The Davis Strait - DCE - Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi

THE DAVIS STRAIT 

A preliminary strategic environmental impact assessment of 

hydrocarbon activities in the eastern Davis Strait 

Scientifi c Report from DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy No. 15 2012 

AU 

AARHUS 

UNIVERSITY 

DCE – DANISH CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY

[Blank page]

AU 




Scientifi c Report from DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy 

Flemming Merkel 1 

David Boertmann 1 

Anders Mosbech 1 

Fernando Ugarte 2 

1 Aarhus University, Department of Bioscience 

2 Greenland Institute of Natural Resources 

AARHUS 

UNIVERSITY 

DCE – DANISH CENTRE FOR ENVIRONMENT AND ENERGY 

No. 15 

2012

Data sheet 

Series title and no.: Scientific Report from DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy No. 15 

Title: The Davis Strait 

Subtitle: A preliminary strategic environmental impact assessment of hydrocarbon activities in 

the eastern Davis Strait 

Editors: Flemming Merkel, David Boertmann, Anders Mosbech & Fernando Ugarte 

Institutions: Aarhus University, Institute of Bioscience and Greenland Institute of Natural Resources 

Contributing authors: Nanette H. Arboe 2 , Martin Blicher 2 , David Boertmann 1 , Erik W. Born 2 , Tenna K. Boye 2 , 

Ann-Dorte Burmeister 2 , Daniel S. Clausen 1 , Michael Dünweber 1 , Morten Frederiksen 1 , 

Rasmus Hedeholm 2 , Kasper L. Johansen 1 , Ole Jørgensen 2 , Flemming Merkel 1 , Anders 

Mosbech 1 , Rasmus Nygaard 2 , Lars M. Rasmussen 2 , Anja Retzel 2 , Aqqalu Rosing- 

Asvid 2 , Doris Schiedek 1 , Mikael Sejr 1 , Helle Siegstad 2 , Malene Simon 2 , Fernando 

Ugarte 2 , Susse Wegeberg 1 & Nikoline Ziemer 2 

1 2 

Departments: Aarhus University, Department of Bioscience and Greenland Institute of Natural 

Resources 

Publisher: Aarhus University, DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and Energy © 

URL: http://dmu.au.dk/en 

Year of publication: January 2012 

Editing completed: December 2011 

Referees: Kim Gustavsen and Hanne Bach, Aarhus University 

Financial support: Greenland Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum 

Please cite as: Merkel, F., Boertmann, D., Mosbech, A. & Ugarte, F (eds). 2012. The Davis Strait. A 

preliminary strategic environmental impact assessment of hydrocarbon activities in 

the eastern Davis Strait. Aarhus University, DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and 

Energy, 280 pp. Scientific Report from DCE – Danish Centre for Environment and 

Energy No. 15. http://www.dmu.dk/Pub/SR15.pdf. 

Reproduction permitted provided the source is explicitly acknowledged 

Abstract: This report is a preliminary strategic environmental impact assessment of activities 

related to exploration, development and exploitation of oil in the eastern Davis Strait. 

Keywords: Strategic environmental impact assessment, SEIA, oil exploration, oil exploitation, oil 

spill, Davis Strait, Southwest Greenland. 

Layout: Graphics Group, AU Silkeborg 

Front page photo: Lars Witting (arc-pic.com) 

Greenland summary: Bjørn Rosing 

English proof reading: Carey Smith 

ISBN: 978-87-92825-28-5 

ISSN (electronic): 2245-0203 

Number of pages: 280 

Internet version: The report is available in electronic format (pdf) at 

http://www.dmu.dk/Pub/SR15.pdf

Contents 

Preface 5 

Summary and conclusions 6 

Dansk resumé 18 

Imaqarniliaq kalaallisooq 30 

1 Introduction 44 

1.1 Coverage of the SEIA 45 

1.2 Abbreviations and acronyms 46 

2 Summary of petroleum activities 48 

2.1 Seismic surveys 48 

2.2 Exploration drilling 48 

2.3 Drilling mud and cuttings 49 

2.4 Appraisal drilling 49 

2.5 Other exploration activities 49 

2.6 Development and production 49 

2.7 Produced water 50 

2.8 Air emmissions 50 

2.9 Other activities 51 

2.10 Accidents 51 

3 Physical environment 52 

3.1 Weather and Climate 52 

3.2 Oceanography 53 

3.3 Ice conditions 54 

4 Biological environment 63 

4.1 Primary productivity 63 

4.2 Zooplankton 65 

4.3 Macrophytes 74 

4.4 Benthos 81 

4.5 Sea ice community 84 

4.6 Fish and shellfish 85 

4.7 Seabirds 93 

4.8 Marine mammals 119 

4.9 Summary of Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs) 146 

5 Natural resource use 149 

5.1 Commercial fisheries 149 

5.2 Subsistence and recreational fisheries and hunting 155 

5.3 Tourism 164

6 Protected areas and threatened species 166 

6.1 International nature protection conventions 166 

6.2 National nature protection legislation 167 

6.3 Threatened species 167 

6.4 NGO designated areas 168 

7 Contaminants, background levels and effects 170 

7.1 AMAP Monitoring Activities 170 

7.2 Conclusions on contamitant levels 173 

7.3 Biological effects 173 

8 Impacts of climate change 176 

8.1 General context 176 

8.2 Primary production and zooplankton 177 

8.3 Benthic fauna 178 

8.4 Fish and shellfish 179 

8.5 Marine mammals and seabirds 181 

8.6 Conclusions 181 

9 Impact assessment 183 

9.1 Methodology and scope 183 

10 Impacts of the potential routine activities 185 

10.1 Exploration activities 185 

10.2 Appraisal activities 196 

10.3 Development and production activities 197 

10.4 Decommissioning 205 

11 Impacts from accidental oils spills 206 

11.1 Oil spills 206 

11.2 Oil spills impacts on the environment 209 

11.3 Oil spill sensitivity mapping 221 

12 Preliminary identification of imformation needs and knowledge 

gaps for environmental management and regulation of oil 

acitivities in Davis Strait 226 

12.1 Knowledge gaps 226 

12.2 Knowledge gaps generic to the arctic 228 

12.3 Proposal for a new environmental study programme 229 

13 References 230

Preface 

The Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP) is planning for further exclusive 

licences for exploration and exploitation of hydrocarbons in the Greenland 

offshore areas of Davis Strait. To support the decision process BMP has 

asked DCE - Danish Centre for Environment and Energy and the Greenland 

Institute of Natural Resources (GINR) to prepare this preliminary Strategic 

Environmental Impact Assessment (SEIA) for the eastern Davis Strait between 

62° and 67° N. 

If more licences are granted, implementation of an environmental background 

study program is planned in order to fill the data gaps that have 

been identified and provide information required to support the environmental 

planning and regulation of the oil activities. The new information 

will be included in an updated SEIA, which will become the new reference 

document for the environmental work and substitute this preliminary version. 

Acknowledgement 

For comments and valuable suggestions to earlier draft sections of this report, 

thanks to Dorte Krause-Jensen (AU), Kristine Arendt (GINR), Torkel 

Gissel Nielsen (DTU-Aqua), Morten Hjorth (AU) and Kaj Sünksen (GINR), 

and Kristin Laidre (GINR and PSC) for making data on krill and capelin 

abundance available. 

5

6 

Summary and conclusions 

This document is a preliminary Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment 

(SEIA) of activities related to exploration, development and exploitation of 

hydrocarbons in the eastern Davis Strait between 62° and 67° N. 

The SEIA has been carried out by DCE - Danish Centre for Environment and 

Energy and the Greenland Institute of Natural Resources (GINR) for the Bureau 

of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP) to support the decision process concerning 

any further exclusive licences for exploration of hydrocarbons in the 

Greenland offshore areas of the Davis Strait. Based on existing published 

and unpublished sources, including three previous assessment reports that 

were prepared in connection with the existing licence blocks (Fig. 1.1.1), the 

SEIA describes the physical and biological environment including protected 

areas and threatened species, contaminent levels, and natural resource use. 

This description of the existing situation then forms the basis for assessment 

of the potential impacts of oil activities. 

If more licences are granted in the assessment area implementation of an environmental 

background study programme is planned to fill the data gaps 

that have been identified and provide information required to support the 

environmental planning and regulation of the oil activities. The new information 

will be included in an updated SEIA, which will become the new reference 

document for the environmental work and substitute this preliminary 

version. 

The assessment area is shown in Figure 1.1.1. This is the region that could 

potentially be impacted by a large oil spill deriving from activities within the 

expected licence areas; although the oil could drift beyond the borders of 

this area. 

The expected activities in the ‘full life cycle’ of a petroleum field are briefly 

described. Because of harsh weather and extensive sea ice in the northern 

and western part of the assessment area, exploration activities would probably 

be hampered during winter and early spring (around December-April). 

However, if oil production is initiated activities will take place throughout 

the year. 

The environment 

The pelagic environment 

The physical conditions of the study area are briefly described with focus on 

oceanography and ice conditions. The southern part of the assessment area 

generally has open water all year around, except for the most western part. 

In the north-western part sea ice is usually present from about February to 

April. Icebergs are occasionally present in late winter and early spring but 

rarely encountered north of Fyllas Banke. This is explained by the pattern of 

currents, the bathymetry and the distant iceberg sources. 

Among the most important features of the environment are the shallowwater 

banks along the west coast of Greenland. High water velocity at these 

banks creates strong upwelling which in turn provides nutrients for sustained 

high primary productivity in these relatively shallow areas. The

anks are normally ice free or have open drift ice year round, except for the 

Store Hellefiskebanke in the northern part of the assessment area. The banks 

can sustain high productivity several months longer than the deep waters 

offshore. Another important feature of the area is the relationship between 

frontal hydrography and plankton communities at the transition between 

the waters of Arctic and temperate origin. Moreover, there are physical and 

chemical differences between (the shallow and freshwater influenced) inshore 

and the offshore area. Therefore, physical processes in the frontal 

zones affect planktonic organisms in a number of ways, including nutrient 

entrainment, elevated primary and secondary production and plankton aggregation. 

The assessment area is situated within the sub-Arctic region of the marine 

environment. The pelagic environment of the offshore part of the assessment 

area has not been studied in detail. However, based on knowledge from the 

shelf area and elsewhere in West Greenland, the pelagic environment is 

characterised by low biodiversity with often numerous and dense animal 

populations; a relatively simple food web from primary producers to top 

predators; and a few species playing a key role in the ecology of the region. 

The most significant ecological event in the marine environment is the 

spring phytoplankton bloom of planktonic algae, the primary producers in 

the food web. These are grazed upon by zooplankton, including the important 

copepods Calanus (mainly C. finmarchicus), which represent one of 

the key species groups in the marine ecosystem. 

Benthic fauna and flora 

Benthic macrofauna species consume a significant proportion of the available 

production and, in turn, are an important food source for fish, seabirds 

and mammals. Some studies are available from the assessment area, but little 

is known about the spatial and temporal variation in community structure 

and there is a general lack of data from certain habitat types and from 

offshore areas. The macroalgae are found along shorelines attached to hard 

and stable substrate, and may occur at a depth of more than 50m. Biomass 

and production of littoral and sub-littoral macroalgae can be significant and 

are important for higher trophic levels of the food web as they provide substrate 

for sessile animals, shelter from predation, protection against wave action 

as well as currents and desiccation or are utilised directly as a food 

source. Existing knowledge of macroalgal diversity in the assessment area is 

very limited, and macroalgal species composition, biomass, production and 

spatial variation are largely unknown. 

Fish 

Fish fauna in the offshore areas, including the marine shelf, is dominated by 

demersal (bottom living) species such as Greenland halibut, Atlantic halibut, 

redfish, wolffish and several less commercially interesting species. For the 

Greenland halibut, which is highly important for the commercial fishery (see 

below), the main spawning ground is presumed to be located within the assessment 

area and is important for stock recruitment both within and outside 

the assessment area (Northwest Greenland and Canada). Sandeel occur 

in dense schools on the banks and are important prey for some species of 

fish, seabirds and baleen whales. In the coastal zone, three important species 

spawn: Atlantic cod, capelin and lumpsucker. The capelin is important prey 

for larger fish, marine mammals, seabirds and for human use. Both the Atlantic 

cod and lumpsucker (the eggs) are utilised on a commercial basis. Arctic 

char is also an important species of the coastal waters and is the target of 

7

8 

much recreational fishing. Other species utilised in small-scale commercial 

or subsistence fisheries include Atlantic salmon, Atlantic halibut and wolffish. 

Seabirds 

Seabird colonies are numerous in the assessment area, but typically smaller 

in size compared with more northern breeding areas in West Greenland. In 

total, 20 species are known as regular breeders in the assessment area and 

the highest density of colonies is found in the extensive archipelago between 

63˚ and 66˚, despite the fact that this area has not been thoroughly surveyed 

for breeding birds. Two species are rare breeders to Greenland – the Atlantic 

puffin and the common murre are listed as near-threatened and endangered, 

respectively, on the Greenland Red list. 

For 13 bird species the importance of the assessment area is classified as 

‘high’ on a national or international scale due to the number of breeding, 

moulting or wintering birds (Tab. 4.7.1). The assessment area is especially 

important as a wintering area. It makes up a large proportion of the open 

water region in Southwest Greenland, where large numbers of seabirds from 

Russia, Iceland, Svalbard and Canada assemble October-May. More than 3.5 

million birds are estimated to winter in the coastal areas alone. The most 

abundant species are thick-billed murre, common eider, king eider and little 

auks. A large, but unknown number of seabirds also migrate through or 

winter in the offshore areas. 

Marine mammals 

Marine mammals are significant components of the marine ecosystem. Five 

species of seal occur in the assessment area, of which harp seals are numerous 

throughout the area during most of the year. Another species, the harbour 

seal, is listed as critically endangered in Greenland. The northernmost 

part of the assessment area overlaps with the southern edge of a key wintering 

habitat for walruses. Among the whales, several baleen whales, such as 

minke whales, fin whales, humpback whales and sei whales, are seasonal 

inhabitants of the assessment area and relatively abundant. The area is part 

of their foraging area during summer and the distribution of the whales often 

correlates with their main prey: capelin, krill and sandeel. The bowhead 

whale migrates through the area in the period January-February towards 

feeding and possibly mating grounds just north of the assessment area. Several 

toothed whales are common in the assessment area: harbour porpoise, 

long-finned pilot whale, northern bottlenose whale and white-beaked dolphin. 

The southern wintering grounds of beluga whales and narwhals extend 

into the northern part of the assessment area. Polar bears occur during 

winter and spring, depending on and in association with the very variable 

sea ice cover. 

Human use 

Human use of natural resources occurs throughout the assessment area; 

subsistence and small-scale use is extensive in the coastal areas, while there 

are substantial commercial fisheries in the offshore parts. Due to open water 

being present all year round in most coastal areas, commercial, subsistence 

and recreational hunting is possible throughout the year, except in various 

closed seasons. Seabirds are among the most popular hunted resources and 

are bagged in large numbers. The most important species are thick-billed 

murre and common eider, and in 2008 approx. 35,000 murres and 11,000 eiders 

were reported harvested in the assessment area. Seals are also harvest-

ed in large numbers in the assessment area. The skins are purchased and 

prepared for the international market by a tannery in South Greenland and 

the meat is consumed locally. The most important species is the harp seal 

and around 30,000 animals per year are currently reported to be harvested 

from the assessment area. Walruses, belugas and narwhals are caught during 

winter and spring in the northern part of the assessment area and regulated 

by quotas. Also harbour porpoises, minke whales, fin whales and 

humpback whales are caught in the assessment area, with harbour porpoise 

and minke whale as far the most numerous species. Minkes and humpback 

and fin whales are subject to annual quotas set by the IWC. Quotas also regulate 

polar bear catches, but only a few animals are shot every year in the assessment 

area. 

Commercial fisheries represent the most important export industry in 

Greenland, accounting for 88% of the total Greenlandic export revenue (1.7 

billion DKK in 2009). Greenland halibut, deep-sea shrimp and snow crab are 

the main commercially exploited species within the assessment area and annual 

catches make up a large proportion of total landings in Greenland. The 

Atlantic cod fishery has increased over the past decade, but recruitment appears 

to be very unstable. Compared with historical levels (1960s) catches 

are still negligible and in 2009-10 the offshore fishery was closed in the assessment 

area. In the coastal area, various species are exploited on a smallscale 

commercial, subsistence or recreational basis, such as lumpsucker, 

wolffish, redfish, Atlantic cod, Greenland cod, capelin and Atlantic salmon. 

Tourism is a growing industry in Greenland and now counts as the third 

largest economic activity in the country. The total number of guests in 2008 

was 82,000 or 250,000 ‘bed nights’, of which the majority went to the assessment 

area, especially Nuuk. In addition, cruise ships bring in tourists in every 

increasing numbers. The coastal marine area is very important for tourist 

activity. 

Climate change 

Climate change has a large potential to modify marine ecosystems, particularly 

in high latitude regions. Alterations in the distribution and abundance 

of keystone species at various trophic levels could have significant and rapid 

consequences for the structure of the ecosystems in which they currently occur. 

Implications for fisheries and hunting are likely to occur. For some populations, 

climate change may act as an additional stressor in relation to existing 

impacting factors such as hunting, leading to higher sensitivity to oil 

spill incidents. Other populations may become more abundant and robust as 

a consequence of climate change. Finally, species composition may change, 

with some species disappearing or moving north and other species moving 

in from the south. 

Contaminants 

Knowledge on background levels of contaminants such as hydrocarbons 

and heavy metals is also important in assessing sensitivity and environmental 

impacts from petroleum activities. 

The levels of certain contaminants, i.e. organochlorines, are still high in 

Greenland due to long-range transport into the Arctic, particular in the 

higher trophic level (e.g. whales, polar bears). In addition, new persistent 

pollutants, such as brominated flame retardants, are now appearing. Levels 

9

10 

of petroleum compounds, including PAHs, are relatively low, except in harbour 

areas, and are regarded as background concentrations. 

However, our present knowledge concerning contaminants in marine organisms 

in Greenland, including the assessment area, is still limited, particular 

the relation between contaminant loads and potential biological impact, including 

sublethal health effects or impairments. More knowledge about species’ 

sensitivity and adequate monitoring strategies are also needed. 

Assessment 

The assessments presented here are based on our present knowledge concerning 

the distribution of species and their tolerance and threshold levels 

toward human activities in relation to oil exploration and production. However, 

the Arctic is changing due to climate change and this process seems to 

be accelerating. This means that conclusions and assessments may need to 

be adjusted in the future. Furthermore, a large part of the assessment area is 

poorly studied and increased knowledge may lead to additional adjustments. 

Normal operations – exploration 

The main environmental impacts of exploration activities derive from noise 

generated either by seismic surveys or the drilling platforms and from cuttings 

and drilling mud if these are released to the sea during the drilling 

process. 

The species most sensitive to noise from seismic surveys in the assessment 

area are the baleen whales (minke, fin, sei and humpback) and toothed 

whales such as sperm and bottlenose whales. These may be in risk of being 

displaced from parts of their critical summer habitats. A displacement 

would also impact the availability of whales to hunters if the habitats include 

traditionally hunting grounds. Narwhals, beluga whales, bowhead 

whales and walruses are also sensitive to seismic noise, but their occurrence 

in the assessment area only overlaps briefly with the time in which seismic 

surveys are expected to take place. 

As seismic surveys are temporary, the risk for long-term population impacts 

from single surveys is low. But long-term impacts have to be assessed if several 

surveys are carried out simultaneously or in the same potentially critical 

habitats in consecutive years (cumulative effects). 3D seismic surveys, which 

are typically conducted in small areas, may cause more severe temporary 

impacts. 

The fishery at risk of impact from noise from seismic surveys in the assessment 

area is the Greenland halibut fishery. The risk is temporary (days or 

weeks) displacement of fish and consequently reduced catches from the 

trawling grounds. Although the precise location of the Greenland halibut 

spawning grounds is not known, planning of seismic surveys in the area 

where spawning is expected to take place should consider avoiding overlap 

with the spawning period (early winter). The fishery for northern shrimp 

and snow crab will probably not be affected. 

Noise from drilling rigs will also be temporary but locally more permanent 

than seismic surveys. The most vulnerable species in the assessment area are

cetaceans (whales and harbour porpoises) and the walruses. If alternative 

habitats are available to the whales no effects are expected, but if several rigs 

operate in the same region there is a risk of cumulative effects and displacement 

even from alternative habitats. 

Drilling mud and cuttings that are released to the seabed will cause local 

impacts on the benthic fauna. Within the assessment area only very local effects 

on the benthos are expected from discharging the water-based muds 

with non-toxic additives from the drilling of an exploration well. Any drilling 

should be avoided in the most vulnerable areas. Baseline studies at drill 

sites must be conducted prior to drilling to document whether unique communities 

or species such as coldwater coral and sponge gardens are at risk of 

being harmed by increased sedimentation. Post-drilling studies should be 

carried out to document whether activities caused any specific effects. 

Exploration drilling is an energy-intensive process emitting large amounts of 

greenhouse gases. Even a single drilling will increase the Greenland contribution 

to global emissions significantly. 

Finally, there is a risk of oil spills during exploration drilling (see below). 

Unacceptable environmental impacts from exploration activities are best 

mitigated by careful planning based on thorough environmental background 

studies, BEP, BAT and application of the Precautionary Principle 

and international standards (OSPAR); for example, by avoiding activities in 

the most sensitive areas and periods. 

Normal operations – development and production 

Activities during development, production and transport are long-lasting, 

and there are several activities which have the potential to cause severe environmental 

impacts. 

Overall, impacts will depend on the number of activities, how far they are 

dispersed in the areas in question, and also on their duration. In this context 

it is important to consider cumulative impacts. 

Emissions and discharges 

Drilling will continue during development and production phases and drilling 

mud and cuttings will be produced in much larger quantities than during 

exploration. Discharges should be limited as much as possible by recycling 

and reinjection and only environmental safe substances (such as the 

‘green’ and ‘yellow’ substances classified by OSPAR) tested for toxicity and 

degradability under arctic conditions should be permitted to be discharged. 

In Greenland the use of ‘black’ chemicals is not permitted and use of ‘red’ 

chemicals requires specific permission. Even the non-toxic discharges alter 

the sediment substrate and if these substances are released to the seabed impacts 

must be expected on the benthic communities near the release sites. 

The release giving most reason for environmental concern, however, is residue 

of oil in produced water. Recent studies have indicated that small 

amounts of oil can impact birds, fish and primary production. The most obvious 

way to mitigate effects of produced water is better cleaning before discharge 

or even better to re-inject the water into the wells as the policy is in 

the Lofoten-Barents Sea area. 

11

12 

Also of concern is discharge of ballast water as this carries the risk of introducing 

non-native and invasive species. Ballast water must therefore be 

handled and discharged subject to specific rules. The problem is currently 

not severe in the Arctic, but risk will increase with climate change and the 

intensive tanker traffic associated with a producing oil field. 

Development of an oil field and production of oil are energy-consuming activities 

that would contribute significantly to the Greenland emission of 

greenhouse gases. A single large Norwegian production field for example, 

emits more than twice the total Greenland CO2 emission of today. 

Noise 

Noise from drilling and the positioning of machinery, which will continue 

during the development and production phase, may potentially lead to 

permanent loss or displacement of important summer habitats for cetaceans, 

especially if several production fields are active at the same time. Noise from 

ships (incl. ice-breaking) and helicopters, which becomes more persistent 

than in the exploratory phase, can both affect marine mammals and seabirds. 

The most sensitive species within the assessment area are the colonial 

seabirds, bowhead whales, narwhals, beluga whales, minke whales, fin 

whales, harbour porpoises and walruses – species that may associate noise 

with negative events (hunting). Traditional hunting grounds may also be affected. 

Applying fixed flying lanes and altitudes will reduce impacts from 

helicopter noise. 

Placement of structures 

Placement of offshore structures and infrastructure may locally impact seabed 

communities and there is a risk of spoiling important feeding grounds – 

walrus is highly sensitive, but occurs mainly north of the assessment area. 

However, feeding areas for king eiders wintering at the shallow-water shelf 

banks (especially Fyllas Banke) may also be at risk. Inland structures may locally 

impact breeding birds; obstruct rivers, with implications for anadromous 

Arctic char; damage coastal flora and fauna; and have an aesthetic impact 

on the pristine landscape, which in turn may impact the local tourism 

industry. 

A specific impact on fisheries is the exclusion/safety zones (typically 500 m) 

that will be established both around temporary and permanent offshore installations. 

These may affect some of the important fishing areas for Greenland 

halibut and northern shrimp. 

Illuminated structures and flares may attract seabirds in the hours of darkness, 

and there is a risk of mass mortality especially for eiders and possibly 

little auks. 

Cumulative impacts 

There will be a risk of cumulative impacts when several activities take place 

either simultaneously or consecutive. For example, seismic surveys have a 

high potential for cumulative impacts. Cumulative impacts may also occur 

in combination with other human activities, such as hunting, or in combination 

with climate change. 

The best way of mitigating impacts from development and production activities 

is to combine a detailed background study of the environment (in order 

to locate sensitive ecosystem components) with careful planning of structure

placement and transport corridors. Subsequent application of BEP, BAT and 

compliance with international standards such as OSPAR and HOCNF can 

do much to reduce emissions to air and sea. 

Accidents 

The most environmentally severe accident from the activities described 

above would be a large oil spill. Accidental oil spills may occur either during 

drilling (blowouts) or from accidents when storing or transporting oil. Large 

oil spills are relatively rare events today due to ever-improving technical solutions 

and HSE policies. However, the risk of an accident cannot be eliminated. 

Oil spill trajectory modelling was not carried out for this preliminary assessment. 

Large oil spills have the potential to impact on all levels in the marine ecosystem, 

from primary production to the top predators. A large oil spill represents 

a threat at population and maybe even species level and the impacts 

may last for decades, as documented for Prince William Sound in Alaska. 

For some populations oil spill mortality can to an extent be compensatory 

(be partly compensated by reduced natural mortality due to less competition), 

while for others it will largely be additive to natural mortality. Some 

populations may recover quickly while others will recover to pre-spill conditions 

very slowly, depending on their life strategies and population status. 

For species which are vulnerable to oil spills and are also harvested, oil spill 

impacts could be mitigated by managing the harvest wisely and sustainably. 

The lack of efficient response methods in partly ice-covered waters and remoteness 

will add to the severity of an oil spill. 

For this impact assessment the offshore areas are divided into eight subareas 

and classified according to their sensitivity to oil spill, taking into account 

the relative abundance of species/species groups; species or population 

specific oil sensitivity values; oil residency; human use ; and a few other 

parameters. During all seasons the offshore areas closest to the coastal zone 

covering the shelf bank areas are among the most sensitive areas. These areas 

are especially important for migrating/wintering seabirds, human use of 

northern shrimp and snow crab, and as foraging areas for baleen whales. 

During spring and winter the southwest corner of the assessment area is also 

classified as highly sensitive to oil spill due to extensive Greenland halibut 

fishery and whelping areas for hooded seals in the western pack ice in 

March and April. 

A comparison of seasons, based on absolute sensitivity values and averaged 

across all offshore areas, shows that winter is most sensitive to oil spill, 

closely followed by spring and autumn, while summer is least sensitive to 

oil spill. The main reason for this difference is the large number of wintering/migrating 

seabirds during winter, spring and autumn, which are all 

very sensitive to oil (especially auks and seaducks). 

The coastal zone of the assessment area is even more sensitive to oil spill due 

to a higher biodiversity and due to the fact that oil may be trapped in bays 

and fjords where high and toxic concentrations can build up in the water. 

There is the potential for a number of negative impacts – on spawning concentrations 

of fish, such as capelin and lumpsucker, in spring; Arctic char as- 

13

14 

sembling outside their spawning rivers; and on many seabird populations in 

summer, during migration periods and especially in winter when seabirds 

from a variety of breeding locations in the North Atlantic gather in Southwest 

Greenland. Long-term impacts may occur in the coastal zone if oil is 

buried in sediments or among boulders, in mussel beds or is imbedded in 

crevices in rocks. Oil seeps from these sites and causes chronic pollution 

which may persist for decades. In Prince William Sound in Alaska such preserved 

oil has caused negative long-term effects on e.g. birds utilising the 

polluted coasts and several populations have not recovered. The coastal 

zone is also of crucial importance for local hunters and fishermen, and in the 

case of an oil spil, these activities may be adversely affected by closure zones 

and/or by changed distribution patterns of the targeted species. The tourist 

industry in the assessment area will probably also be impacted negatively by 

oil exposure in the coastal area. 

Another vulnerable feature is the winter/spring period with ice- covered 

waters in the northern and western part of the assessment area. To begin 

with spilled oil would be contained between the ice floes and on the rough 

underside of the ice. However, oil in ice may be transported in an almost unweathered 

state over long distances and when the ice melts may impact the 

environment, e.g. seabirds and marine mammals, far from the spill site. Oil 

may also be caught along ice edges and in marginal ice zones with sensitive 

aggregations such as primary producers, seabirds and marine mammals. 

In general, accidents are best mitigated by careful planning, strict Health, 

Safety and Environment (HSE) procedures and application of the Precautionary 

Principle in combination with BEP, BAT and international standards 

(OSPAR). However, knowledge of the behaviour of spilled oil in ice environments 

is very limited and the technology for cleaning up oil spills in icecovered 

waters is inadequate and in need of further development. 

Primary production and zooplankton 

It is assessed that the impact of a surface oil spill in the assessment area on 

primary production and zooplankton in open waters will be low due to the 

large temporal and spatial variation in these events and occurrences. There 

is, however, a risk of impacts (reduced production) in localised primary 

production areas and the spring bloom will be the most sensitive period. 

Experience learned from the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Mexican 

Gulf in 2010, where huge subsea plumes of dispersed oil were found at different 

depths, may change the conclusion of relatively mild impacts for extremely 

large subsea spills to more acute and severe impacts. It is too early 

to draw conclusions on the effects of a subsea spill like the spill from the 

Deepwater Horizon as there is still very little scientific information available 

on effects from this incident. But if large subsea plumes of dispersed oil in 

toxic concentrations occur, stronger impacts than from a surface spill must 

be expected, especially on primary producers, zooplankton and fish/shrimp 

larvae. 

Fish and crustacean larvae 

In general, eggs and larvae of fish and crustacean are more sensitive to oil 

than adults and may theoretically be impacted by reduced annual recruitment 

with some effect on subsequent populations and fisheries for a number 

of years. Atlantic cod is especially sensitive as their eggs and larvae can be 

concentrated in the upper 10m of the water column, whereas larvae of

shrimp and Greenland halibut, for instance, are found deeper and would 

therefore be less exposed to harmful oil concentrations from an oil spill at 

the surface. However, an extremely large subsea blowout may expose eggs 

and larvae over much larger areas and depth ranges and may potentially also 

impact the recruitment and stock size of other species, such as shrimp, 

Greenland halibut, snow crab and sandeel. 

Benthos 

Bottom-living organisms such as bivalves and crustaceans are vulnerable to 

oil spills; however, no effects are expected in the open water unless oil sinks 

to the seabed. In shallow waters (< 10-15m), highly toxic concentrations of 

hydrocarbons can reach the seafloor with possible severe consequences for 

local benthos and thereby also for species utilising the benthos – especially 

common eider, king eider, long-tailed duck, bearded seal and walrus. A subsea 

spill with the size and properties of the spill from the Deepwater Horizon 

in the Mexican Gulf has the potential to impact the seabed communities 

in deep waters too. 

Adult fish 

Impacts from a surface spill on adult fish stocks in the open sea are not expected. 

The situation is different however in coastal areas, where high and 

toxic oil concentrations can build up in sheltered bays and fjords resulting in 

high fish mortality (see above). Once more, a large subsea blowout could 

represent an exception as far as low impact is concerned. Considerable 

plumes of dispersed oil can occur in the water column from a subsea blowout 

and may impact the fish both directly or through the food chain. Greenland 

halibut would be exposed in both ways, because they move up from 

the seabed to the pelagic waters to feed. 

Fisheries 

An oil spill in the open sea will affect fisheries mainly by means of temporary 

closure in order to avoid contaminated catch. Closure time would depend 

on the duration of the oil spill, weather, etc. The offshore fishery for 

Greenland halibut within the assessment area is large and a closure zone 

would probably extend further west and cover Canadian fishing grounds 

too. The reason is that Greenland halibut moves considerable distances over 

a very short time and contaminated (tainted) fish may move out of the assessment 

area and be caught far from a spill site. 

The assessment area is also among the most important fishing grounds in 

Greenland for northern shrimp and snow crab, and closure zones may also 

have significant economic consequences for this section of the fishing industry. 

Oiled coastal areas would also be closed for fisheries for a period – the duration 

of the closure would depend on the behaviour of the oil. There are examples 

of closure for many months due to oil spills, particularly if oil is 

caught in sediments or on beaches. The commercial inshore fishery targets 

primarily lumpsucker and local populations of Atlantic cod, while capelin 

form part of the subsistence and recreational fishery. 

Seabirds 

Seabirds are extremely vulnerable to oil spills in the marine environment as 

they usually spend much time at the surface where most oil spills occur. 

Their plumage is highly sensitive to oil, as only small amounts can destroy 

15

16 

its insulation and buoyancy properties. Exposed birds usually die from hypothermia, 

starvation, drowning or intoxication. In the assessment area the 

coastal zone is particularly sensitive as high concentrations of seabirds are 

found all year around. A substantial number of these birds, including breeding 

birds, moulting birds as well as wintering birds, are associated with habitats 

along the highly exposed outer coastline. In these areas, oil spill response 

is hampered by remoteness, the complex coastal morphology and the 

often harsh weather conditions. The seabird species most vulnerable to oil 

spills are those with low reproductive capacity (low population turnover), a 

trait especially found among auks, fulmars and many seaducks. These species, 

e.g. thick-billed murres, little auks, eiders and long-tailed ducks, winter 

in the assessment area in large numbers as Southwest Greenland constitutes 

an international wintering area for seabirds from a range of breeding locations 

in the North Atlantic. 

During autumn and winter, a number of species are also at risk further offshore 

in the assessment area, including the shelf areas; although birds tend 

to be more dispersed in the open water compared to coastal habitats. Some 

of the important species include northern fulmar, black-legged kittiwake, 

puffin, little auk, thick-billed murre, black guillemot and king eider. Especially 

the king eider is vulnerable in the offshore area as the birds assemble 

in large dense flocks on the shallow-water shelf banks during winter (Fyllas 

Banke and Store Hellefiskebanke). A major oil spill in these areas could seriously 

affect this population. 

Marine mammals 

Polar bears and seal pups are highly vulnerable to direct oiling and even 

short exposures can be lethal, as the oil affects the insulation properties of 

the fur. There are seal pup areas in the assessment area (see below), while 

polar bears are associated with the Davis Strait pack ice, of which the extent 

lying within the assessment area varies. 

Whales, seals and walruses are vulnerable to surface oil spills. The baleens of 

the baleen whales may become smothered with oil. This may affect their filtration 

capability or lead to toxic effects and injuries in the gastrointestinal 

tract if oil is ingested. There is also the potential for inhalation of oil vapours 

and direct contact of the oil with eye tissues. The extent to which marine 

mammals actively avoid an oil slick and also how harmful the oil would be 

to fouled individuals is uncertain. However, observations indicate that at 

least some species do not perceive oil as a danger and have repeatedly been 

reported to swim directly into oil slicks. 

Marine mammal species affected by an oil spill during winter in the assessment 

area could include bearded seal, hooded seal, ringed seal, harbour seal, 

bowhead whale, narwhal, white whale, polar bear, harbour porpoise, walrus, 

bottlenose whale and sperm whale. Harbour seals are especially vulnerable 

as they are endangered in Greenland, and hooded seals too, because 

whelping patches are located in the eastern Davis Strait pack ice. Marine 

mammals that use the area as a feeding ground during summer include harp 

seal, hooded seal, ringed seal, harbour seal, fin whale, humpback whale, 

minke whale, sei whale, harbour porpoise, white beaked dolphin, bottlenose 

whale, sperm whale, and pilot whale. Blue whale occurs only rarely in the 

assessment area but is vulnerable due to its very small population.

Mitigation 

The risk of accidents and their environmental impacts can be minimised 

with high safety levels; planning to avoid the most sensitive areas and periods; 

and efficient contingency plans with access to adequate equipment and 

oil spill sensitivity maps where the most sensitive areas have been identified. 

Knowledge gaps and new studies 

There is a general lack of knowledge on many of the ecological components 

and processes in the Davis Strait area. A preliminary identification of information 

needs and knowledge gaps for environmental management and regulation 

of future oil activities in the Davis Strait can be found in chapter 12. 

To manage future oil activities, more information is required in order to: a) 

assess, plan and regulate activities to minimise the risk of impacts; b) identify 

the most sensitive areas and update the Oil Spill Sensitivity Mapping; c) 

establish a baseline to use in ‘before and after’ studies for impacts from any 

large oil spills. 

17

18 

Dansk resumé 

Denne rapport er en foreløbig, strategisk miljøvurdering af aktiviteter forbundet 

med olieefterforskning og -udvinding i den grønlandske del af Davis 

Strædet, nærmere bestemt farvandet mellem 62° og 67° N. 

Miljøvurderingen er udarbejdet af DCE - Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi 

(DCE) og Grønlands Naturinstitut for Råstofdirektoratet, med henblik på 

at indgå i beslutningsprocessen om at udbyde yderligere licensområder til 

olieefterforskning i de grønlandske offshore områder af Davis Strædet. På 

baggrund af eksisterende publiceret og upubliceret litteratur, inklusiv tre 

tidligere miljøvurderinger udarbejdet i forbindelse med de eksisterende licensblokke, 

beskriver denne miljøvurdering det fysiske og biologiske miljø, 

inklusiv beskyttede områder, truede arter, kontaminantniveauer samt udnyttelse 

af de biologiske resurser. Baseret på denne beskrivelse af den nuværende 

situation, vurderes de potentielle konsekvenser af olieaktiviteter. Tilvejebringelse 

af yderlig information vil gøre det muligt, at reducere usikkerheden 

på vurderinger af de potentielle konsekvenser. 

Såfremt der tildeles flere licensblokke, er det planlagt at initiere et undersøgelsesprogram, 

som skal udfylde identificerede videnshuller og understøtte 

den miljømæssige planlægning og regulering af olieaktiviteter. Den ny viden 

vil blive inkluderet i en opdateret miljøvurdering, som skal være et referencedokument 

for miljøarbejdet og vil erstatte denne midlertidige miljøvurdering. 

Vurderingsområdet er vist på figur 1.1.1. Dette område kan potentielt blive 

påvirket af et stort oliespild, forårsaget af aktiviteterne i de forventede licensområder. 

Afhængig af vind og strømforhold kan olien dog drive til områder 

udenfor den viste afgrænsning. 

Aktiviteterne fra en komplet livscyklus for et oliefelt er kort beskrevet og så 

vidt muligt vurderet, med vægt på de aktiviteter og hændelser som erfaringsmæssigt 

giver de væsentligste miljøpåvirkninger. Men da der ikke er 

erfaringer med udvinding af olie i Grønland, er vurderinger af aktiviteter i 

denne forbindelse ikke konkrete, men bygger på erfaringer fra andre områder 

med så vidt muligt sammenlignelige forhold. Der er især trukket på den 

meget omfangsrige litteratur om det store oliespild i Prince William Sund i 

Alaska i 1989, den norske miljøvurdering af olieaktiviteter i Barentshavet 

(2003) og på Arktisk Råds ”Arctic Oil and Gas Assessment”. Endvidere er 

der inddraget viden fra det nylige store undersøiske olieudslip i den Mexicanske 

Golf (2010), om end erfaringerne herfra endnu er begrænsede. 

På grund af barske vejrforhold og udbedt havis i de nordlige og vestlige dele 

af vurderingsområdet forventes olieefterforskningsaktiviteterne, at være 

vanskeliggjort i vinterperioden samt i det tidlige forår (ca. december – april). 

Men såfremt en egentlig olieproduktion påbegyndes, forventes der at pågå 

aktiviteter året rundt.

Miljøet 

Det pelagiske miljø 

De fysiske forhold i vurderingsområdet er kort beskrevet med fokus på oceanografi 

og isforhold. Den sydlige del af området er normalt isfrit året rundt, 

med udtagelse af de mest vestlige dele. Den nordvestlige del af vurderingsområdet 

er sædvanligvis isdækket fra omkring februar til april. Af og til forekommer 

der isbjerge i området, hyppigst senvinter og forår. Isfjelde ses 

dog sjældent nord for Fyllas Banke. Dette skyldes strømforhold, bathymetri 

og den lange afstand til produktive isbræer. 

Offshore-bankerne i Sydvestgrønland hører til blandt de vigtigste karakteristika 

for havmiljøet i vurderingsområdet. En høj vandgennemstrømning 

over disse forholdsvis lavvandede områder forårsager en kraftig opstigning 

af næringsrigt vand, som skaber basis for en langvarig høj primærproduktion. 

Bankerne er sædvanligvis helt eller delvis isfrie (løst drivis) året rundt, 

med undtagelse af Store Hellefiskebanke i den nordlige del af vurderingsområdet. 

Den høje primærproduktivitet på bankerne opretholdes i op til flere 

måneder længere end på dybere offshore lokaliteter. En anden vigtig 

egenskab for området er overgangszonen, hvor arktiske og tempererede 

havstrømme mødes. De fysiske processer der er forbundet med frontzonerne 

påvirker planktonorganismerne på forskellig vis, herunder næringstilgangen 

og dermed niveauet for primær- og sekundærproduktion samt 

planktonfordelingen. Desuden adskiller havvand fra de mere kystnære områder 

sig fysisk og kemisk fra det mere oceaniske vand, idet det opblandes 

med ferskvand fra oplandet. 

Vurderingsområdet er beliggende indenfor det subarktiske område. Det pelagiske 

miljø i offshore områderne er dårligt undersøgt, men ud fra oplysninger 

fra fiskebankerne samt andre områder i Grønland, er det pelagiske 

miljø i vurderingsområdet karakteriseret ved lav biodiversitet - men ofte talrige 

og tætte koncentrationer af de tilstedeværende populationer, en relativ 

simpel fødekæde fra primærproducenter til topprædatorer og nogle få arter 

der spiller en nøglerolle i det økologiske system. Den mest markante økologiske 

begivenhed i det marine miljø er forårsopblomstringen af fytoplankton, 

som udgør primærproducenterne i fødekæden. Disse græsses af 

zooplankton, inklusiv de vigtige Calanus vandlopper (primært C. finmarchicus), 

som udgør nøglearter i det marine økosystem. 

Bentisk fauna og flora 

Den bentiske makrofauna konsumerer en betydelig del af den tilgængelige 

primærproduktion og udgør til gengæld vigtige fødeemner for fisk, havfugle 

og havpattedyr. Der findes kun få makrofauna studier fra vurderingsområdet 

og generelt mangler der viden om den rumlige og tidsmæssige variation 

i samfundsstrukturen, viden fra særlige habitattyper og fra offshore områderne. 

Makroalgerne findes langs kystlinjen, tilknyttet hård bund, og kan 

forekomme på mere end 50 m dybde. Biomassen og produktionen af litorale 

og sublitorale makroalger kan være betydelig og dermed vigtig for de højere 

trofiske niveauer i fødekæden. De kan fungere som substrat for fastsiddende 

organismer, yde beskyttelse mod prædation, udtørring, strøm og bølgeslag 

eller som direkte føde emne. I det aktuelle område er viden om makroalgernes 

diversitet meget begrænset og makroalgernes artssammensætning, biomasse, 

produktion og rumlig variation er stort set ukendt. 

19

20 

Fisk 

Fiskefaunaen i offshore områderne, inklusiv fiskebankerne, er domineret af 

bundlevende arter, så som hellefisk, helleflynder, rødfisk, havkat samt andre 

ikke-kommercielle arter. For hellefisk, der udgør en meget vigtig kommerciel 

fiskeriresurse, antages det at det primære gydeområde ligger indenfor 

vurderingsområdet og er væsentlig for bestands-rekrutteringen også udenfor 

området (Nordvestgrønland og Canada). Tobis forekommer i tætte stimer 

på fiskebankerne og udgør vigtigt bytte for visse fisk, havfugle og bardehvaler. 

I det kystnære område gyder tre vigtige arter: torsk, lodde og 

stenbider. Lodde er vigtig som bytte for større fisk, havfugle, havpattedyr 

samt for mennesker. Både torsk og stenbider (rogn) udnyttes på kommercielt 

basis. Fjeldørred er også en vigtig art i det kystnære område og er genstand 

for meget lystfiskeri. Andre arter som udnyttes i mindre skala, kommercielt 

eller ikke-kommercielt, er havørred, helleflynder og havkat. 

Havfugle 

Havfugle kolonier er talrige i vurderingsområdet, om end de typisk er mindre 

i størrelse sammenlignet med nordligere kolonier i Vestgrønland. I alt er 

20 arter kendt som almindelige ynglefugle fra området og den højeste tæthed 

af kolonier findes i skærgårdsområdet mellem 63˚ and 66˚N, på trods af 

at dette område ikke er systematisk gennemsøgt for ynglefugle. To arter hører 

til blandt de mere sjældne ynglefugle i Grønland, nemlig lunde og atlantisk 

lomvie, og disse er listet som henholdsvis ”næsten truet” og ”udryddelsestruet” 

på den grønlandske rødliste. 

For 13 arter er deres vigtighed for vurderingsområdet klassificeret som ”høj” 

på en national eller international skala, grundet antallet af ynglefugle, fældefugle 

eller overvintrende fugle (Tab. 4.7.1). Vurderingsområdet er særlig vigtigt 

som overvintringsområde for havfugle. Området udgør en stor andel af 

åbentvandsområdet i Sydvestgrønland, som huser et stort antal overvintrende 

havfugle fra Rusland, Island, Svalbard og Canada i perioden oktobermaj. 

Det er estimeret at mere end 3,5 millioner fugle overvintre alene i det 

kystnære område. De mest talrige arter er polarlomvie, almindelig ederfugl, 

kongeederfugl og søkonge. Et ukendt, men stort, antal havfugle migrerer 

desuden gennem eller overvintrer i offshore områderne. 

Havpattedyr 

Havpattedyr udgør en signifikant komponent af det marine økosystem. Fem 

arter af sæler forekommer i vurderingsområdet, blandt hvilke grønlandssæl 

er talrig i hele området gennem det meste af året, mens spættet sæl er opført 

som ”kritisk udryddelsestruet” på den grønlandske rødliste. Den nordlige 

del af vurderingsområdet overlapper med den sydlige del af et vigtigt overvintringsområde 

for hvalros. Blandt hvalerne, er der flere bardehvaler som 

periodevist forekommer relativt hyppigt i vurderingsområdet, herunder vågehval, 

finhval, pukkelhval og sejhval. Området er en del af deres fourageringsområde 

om sommeren og fordelingen af hvalerne er ofte korreleret 

med de primære fødeemner: lodde, krill og tobis. Grønlandshval migrerer 

gennem området i januar-februar måned, på vej mod fourageringsområder 

og muligvis yngleområder umiddelbart nord for vurderingsområdet. Flere 

tandhvaler er også almindelige i området, herunder marsvin, grindehval, 

døgling og hvidnæse. De sydlige overvintringsområder for hvidhvaler og 

narhvaler strækker sig desuden ind i den nordlige del af vurderingsområdet. 

Isbjørn forekommer i den vestlige del af området vinter og forår, afhængig 

af og knyttet til Vestisens udbredelse i Davis Strædet.

Fangst og udnyttelse 

Menneskelig udnyttelse af de naturlige resurser er udbredt i hele området; 

fritidsfangst og erhvervsfangst i mindre skala er udbredt i det kystnære område, 

mens et betydeligt kommercielt fiskeri foregår udenskærs. Da det meste 

af det kystnære område normalt er isfrit året rundt, er fangstmulighederne 

også gode det meste af året, om end der er fangstforbud i visse perioder. 

Havfugle er blandt de vigtigste resurser og bliver skudt i et betydeligt antal. 

Polarlomvie og ederfugl er de mest eftertragtede arter og i 2008 blev henholdsvis 

35.000 og 11.000 fugle rapporteret skudt i vurderingsområdet. Sæler 

bliver også skudt/fanget i stort antal. Skindene bliver solgt og klargjort 

til det internationale marked på et garveri i Sydgrønland, mens kødet konsumeres 

lokalt. Den vigtigste art er grønlandssæl og der rapporteres årligt 

en fangst på ca. 30.000 dyr i vurderingsområdet. Hvalros, hvidhval og narhval 

nedlægges vinter og forår i den nordlige det af området og er reguleret 

af kvoter. Desuden nedlægges marsvin, vågehval, finhval og pukkelhval i 

området, hvoraf fangsten af de to førstnævnte udgør langt den største andel. 

Vågehval, finhval og pukkelhval er underkastet fangstkvoter, bestemt af 

IWC. Isbjørn skydes fåtalligt i den nordlige del af vurderingsområdet og reguleres 

ligeledes af kvoter. 

Det kommercielle fiskeri repræsenterer det vigtigste eksporterhverv i Grønland 

og i 2009 udgjorde det 88 % af Grønlands eksportindtægt (1.7 milliard 

DKK). Hellefisk, rejer og krabber er de primære arter der udnyttes kommercielt 

i vurderingsområdet og de årlige fangster udgør en stor andel af de totale 

fangster i Grønland. Torskefiskeriet er vokset indenfor det seneste årti, 

men rekrutteringen til bestanden er meget ustabil. Sammenlignet med tidligere 

(1960’erne), er de nuværende fangster af torsk ubetydelige; i 2009-10 

var der helt lukket for udenskærsfiskeri efter torsk i vurderingsområdet. I 

det kystnære område pågår et mindre fiskeri, som fritidsfangst eller kommerciel 

fangst, af arter som stenbider, havkat, rødfisk, torsk, fjordtorsk, lodde, 

fjeldørred og laks. 

Turisme er en voksende industri i Grønland og udgør nu det tredjestørste 

erhverv på landsbasis. Det samlede antal gæster i 2008 var 82.000 (eller 

250.000 overnatninger), hvoraf størstedel besøgte vurderingsområdet og 

især Nuuk. Desuden bidrager krydstogtskibe med et større og større antal 

besøgende. Det kystnære område er meget væsentlig aktiv for turistindustrien. 

Klimaændringer 

Klimaændringer kan påvirke det marine økosystem markant, specielt i arktiske 

egne. Ændringer i fordelinger og tætheder af nøglearter på forskellige 

trofiske niveauer, kan få drastiske konsekvenser for den økosystemstruktur, 

som de nu er en del af. Fangst og fiskeri vil højst sandsynligt blive påvirket. 

For nogle populationer vil klimaændringer virke som en ekstra stressfaktor, 

på linje med f.eks. jagt, og medføre en højere følsomhed overfor oliespild. 

Andre populationer kan blive hyppigere og mere robuste overfor oliespild, 

som en konsekvens af klimaændringer. Endelig er det sandsynligt at artssammensætningen 

vil ændre sig, eftersom nogle arter forsvinder og andre 

kommer til som konsekvens af en nordlig forskydning i udbredelse. 

Kontaminanter 

Viden om baggrundsniveauer for kontaminanter, så som kulbrinter og 

tungmetaller, er væsentlig for at kunne vurdere sårbarheden og de miljømæssige 

konsekvenser af olieaktiviteter. 

21

22 

Niveauet af visse kontaminanter, herunder organoklorider, er stadig højt i 

Grønland på grund af langtransport af stofferne til Arktis. Niveauet er særlig 

højt i de øverste trofiske niveauer, såsom hos hvaler og isbjørne. Desuden 

er nye persistente forurenende stoffer nu blevet målbare, såsom bromerede 

flammehæmmere. Med undtagelse af havneområder er niveauet af olieforbindelser, 

inklusiv PAH’er, relativt lavt og regnes som værende baggrundsværdier. 

Vores nuværende vide om kontaminanter i marine organismer i Grønland, 

inklusiv vurderingsområdet, er dog stadig begrænset. Det gælder særligt 

sammenhængen mellem kontaminantbelastning og potentielle biologiske effekter, 

inklusiv subletale sundhedseffekter og funktionsnedsættelser. Mere 

viden om artsspecifik sensitivitet og om brugbare moniteringsstrategier er 

også tiltrængt. 

Vurdering af aktiviteter 

Nærværende vurderinger bygger på viden om arternes nuværende fordeling, 

deres tolerance og tærskelværdier overfor olierelaterede aktiviteter, 

samt på de eksisterende klimatiske forhold. Klimaændringer forventes imidlertid 

at ændre meget på miljøet i vurderingsområdet i de kommende årtier 

og det er derfor ikke givet, at konklusionerne er gældende for fremtidige 

forhold. Samtidig er en stor del af vurderingsområdet dårligt undersøgt og 

ny viden kan derfor også ændre på konklusionerne. 

Efterforskning 

Efterforskningsaktiviteter er midlertidige, de varer typisk nogle år og vil for 

det meste være spredt ud over de tildelte licensområder. Hvis der ikke lokaliseres 

olie, der kan udnyttes, ophører aktiviteterne helt. Findes der olie, vil 

aktiviteterne overgå til udvikling og udnyttelse af oliefeltet (se nedenfor). 

De væsentligste påvirkninger fra efterforskningsaktiviteter kan være forstyrrelser 

fra støjende aktiviteter (f.eks. seismiske undersøgelser, boring i havbunden 

og helikopterflyvninger) fra selve boreprocessen og udledninger. 

Alvorlige påvirkninger kan undgås med forebyggende tiltag, som f.eks. ved 

at undgå aktiviteter i særligt følsomme områder eller perioder. 

De arter i området som er mest sensitiv overfor støj fra seismiske undersøgelser 

er bardehvalerne (vågehval, finhval, sejhval og pukkelhval) og tandhvaler 

som kaskelot og døgling. Disse risikerer at blive bortskræmt fra vigtige 

opholdsområder om sommeren. En fordrivelse eller forskydning i udbredelse 

af hvalerne vil påvirke tilgængeligheden for fangerne, såfremt de oprindelige 

opholdsområder var vigtige fangstområder. Narhval, hvidhval, 

grønlandshval og hvalros er også sårbare overfor seismisk støj, men deres 

forekomst i området overlapper kun i mindre grad med de seismiske undersøgelser. 

Da seismiske undersøgelser kun er midlertidige, er risikoen for langtidspåvirkninger 

på populationer, forårsaget af enkelte surveys, ret lav. Risikoen er 

dog til stede, såfremt der udføres flere undersøgelser samtidig, eller hvis 

undersøgelserne foregår i det samme kritiske område i lange perioder eller i 

adskillelige år i træk (kumulative effekter). Særlige 3D-seismiske undersøgelser, 

der typisk foregår i begrænsede områder, kan give anledning til mere 

markante midlertidige påvirkninger.

Indenfor fiskeriet, er risikoen for påvirkninger af seismisk støj størst for hellefisk. 

Disse risikere midlertidigt (dage eller uger) at blive kortskræmt og 

kan resultere i mindre fangst på fiskepladserne. Selvom det præcise gydeområde 

for hellefisk er usikkert, må det anbefales at undgå seismiske undersøgelser 

i deres gydeperiode (tidlig vinter). Fiskeriet af rejer og krabber vil 

sandsynligvis ikke påvirkes. 

Støj fra boreplatforme er også midlertidige, men lokalt mere permanent end 

seismiske undersøgelser. De mest sårbare arter i vurderingsområdet er hvaler 

og hvalros. Såfremt alternative habitater er tilgængelige for hvalerne, forventes 

der ikke nogen negativ effekt af aktiviteten, men hvis flere platforme 

opererer samtidig i et område, er der risiko for kumulative effekter og bortskræmning 

selv fra alternative habitater. 

Boremudder og –spåner der bliver udledt på havbunden vil påvirke bundfaunaen. 

I vurderingsområdet forventes kun lokale effekter af udledningerne, 

såfremt de mest miljøvenlige typer af boremudder benyttes. Prøveboringer 

i de mest sårbare områder bør dog helt undgås. Der skal foretages basisundersøgelser 

på borestederne før boringerne, med henblik på at dokumentere 

og vurdere om unikke samfund eller arter, så som koldtvandskoraller 

eller svampehaver, vil være i risiko ved en øget sedimentation. Undersøgelser 

efter boringer skal dokumentere at der ikke er specifikke effekter. 

Efterforskningsboringer er energikrævende processer og vil medføre store 

udledninger af drivhusgasser. Blot en enkelt boring vil forøge det grønlandske 

bidrag betydeligt. 

Endelig vil der være risiko for oliespild (‘blow-out’) i forbindelse med en efterforskningsboring 

(se nedenstående). 

Uacceptable miljøpåvirkninger ved efterforskningsaktiviteter undgås bedst 

ved nøje planlægning baseret på grundige miljøundersøgelser, brug af ”Best 

Available Technique” (BAT) og ”Best Environmental Practice” (BEP) og ved 

at følge forsigtighedsprincipper og internationale standarder (OSPAR), f.eks. 

ved at undgå aktiviteter i de mest følsomme områder og perioder. 

Udvikling og produktion 

Aktiviteterne ved udvikling, produktion og transport er langvarige (årtier) 

og der er adskillelige aktiviteter, som potentielt kan medføre alvorlige miljøpåvirkninger. 

Generelt vil påvirkningerne afhænge af antallet af aktiviteter, deres indbyrdes 

afstand i det aktuelle område samt deres varighed. I denne sammenhæng 

er det vigtig, at vurdere risikoen for kumulative effekter. 

Udledninger 

Boringerne vil fortsætte under udvikling og produktionsfasen og boremudder 

og spåner vil blive produceret i meget større mængder end i efterforskningsfasen. 

Udledninger bør minimeres mest muligt, ved at genbruge og tilbageføre 

materialerne og kun udledning af miljøvenlige kemikalier (f.eks. 

dem som ifølge OSPAR er klassificeret som ’grønne’ og ’gule’), der er blevet 

testet for giftighed og nedbrydning under arktiske forhold, bør tillades. Brugen 

af ”sorte” kemikalier er forbudt i Grønland og de ”røde” kemikalier kan 

kun benyttes hvis der tildeles dispensation. Ikke-giftige udledningerne kan 

23

24 

ændre fordelingen af kornstørrelser på havbunden og påvirke bundfaunaen 

i nærheden af udledningsstederne. 

De udledninger som imidlertid giver størst årsag til bekymring, er produktionsvand 

(som er vand der pumpes op sammen med olien) som kan indeholde 

rester af olie. Nyere undersøgelser indikerer at selv små mængder af 

olie kan påvirke fugle, fisk og primærproduktionen. Den mest oplagte måde 

at undgå sådanne effekter, er at rense produktionsvandet bedre inden det 

udledes, eller endnu bedre at pumpe vandet tilbage i produktionshullet, 

som det er praksis i Lofoten-Barentshavet. 

Udledninger af ballastvand medfører en risiko for at introducere ikkehjemmehørende 

eller invasive arter. Derfor skal ballastvand behandles og 

udledes efter særlige regler. Dette er endnu ikke et stort problem i Arktis, 

men risikoen vil stige i takt med klimaændringer og den mere intensive trafik 

af tankskibe som opstår ved et producerende oliefelt. 

Udvikling af et oliefelt og produktionen af olie er meget energikrævende og 

aktiviteten vil bidrage markant til Grønlands udledning af drivhusgasser. Et 

af de store norske oliefelter udleder i dag således mere end dobbelt så meget 

CO2 som hele Grønland tilsammen. 

Støj 

Støj fra boringer og positionering af maskinel, som vil fortsætte i udvikling 

og produktionsfasen, kan potentielt føre til permanente tab eller forskydninger 

af vigtige sommerhabitater for hvalerne, særligt hvis flere produktionsfelter 

er aktive samtidig. Støj fra skibe (inkl. isbrydere) og helikoptere, nu 

mere permanente end i efterforskningsfasen, kan påvirke både havpattedyr 

og havfugle. De mest sårbare arter i vurderingsområdet er de kolonirugende 

havfugle, grønlandshval, narhval, hvidhval, vågehval, finhval, marsvin og 

hvalros – arter som muligvis forbinder støj med negative begivenheder, så 

som jagt. Traditionelle fangstområder kan også blive påvirket. Brug af faste 

flyveruter og –højder vil minimere påvirkningerne fra helikopterstøj. 

Placering af installationer 

Placering af offshore installationer og etablering af infrastruktur kan lokalt 

påvirke artssamfund på havbunden og der er en risiko for at ødelægge vigtige 

fourageringsområder - hvalros er sårbar, om end de hovedsageligt forekommer 

i den nordlige del af vurderingsområdet. Fourageringsområder for 

overvintrene kongeederfugle på fiskebankerne (særligt Fyllas Banke) er også 

følsomme. Installationer i land kan lokalt påvirke ynglende fugle, hindre 

fjeldørreder vejen til visse elve, ødelægge den kystnære flora og fauna, samt 

påvirke det æstetiske indtryk af det uberørte landskab. Sidstnævnte kan få 

betydning for turismen. 

En særlig påvirkning af fiskeriet er de sikkerheds/afspærringszoner (typisk 

500 m) som etableres rundt om midlertidige eller permanente offshore installationer. 

Disse vil få en betydning, i de områder hvor der fiskes intensivt 

efter hellefisk og rejer. 

Oplyste installationer og flares (gasflammer) kan tiltrække havfugle når det 

er mørkt og der er en risiko for at specielt ederfugle og måske søkonger kolliderer 

med installationerne.

Kumulative effekter 

Der vil være en risiko for kumulative effekter når flere aktiviteter foregår 

samtidigt eller i forlængelse af hinanden. Eksempelvis har seismiske undersøgelser 

et stort potentiale for at forårsage kumulative effekter. Kumulative 

effekter kan også forekomme i kombination med andre menneskelige aktiviteter, 

så som jagt, eller i kombination med klimaændringer. 

Påvirkninger fra udvikling og produktionsfasen kan begrænses mest muligt 

ved at kombinere detaljerede miljøundersøgelser (for at lokalisere sårbare 

økosystem komponenter) med nøje planlægning af placeringen af installationer 

og transportruter. Ligeledes skal BEP, BAT og internationale standarder 

(f.eks. OSPAR og HOCNF) implementeres, for at reducere udledninger i 

havet og til atmosfæren. 

Oliespild 

Det miljømæssige mest kritiske uheld der kan ske ved de ovennævnte aktiviteter 

er et stort oliespild. Et oliespild kan ske under selve boringen (‘blowout’) 

eller ved uheld i forbindelse med opbevaring eller transport af olien. 

Store oliespild er forholdsvis sjældne, fordi de tekniske løsninger og sikkerhedsforanstaltninger 

til stadighed forbedres. Risikoen er imidlertid altid tilstede. 

Modellering af oliespildsscenarier er ikke udført for det nærværende vurderingsområde 

i Davisstrædet. 

Store oliespild kan potentielt påvirke alle niveauer af det marine økosystem, 

fra primær-producenter til topprædatorer. Det kan udgøre en trussel på populations- 

og måske endda artsniveau og påvirkningerne kan vare i adskillelige 

årtier, som det er dokumenteret for Prince William Sundet i Alaska. For 

nogle populationer kan dødeligheden i nogen udstrækning være kompensatorisk, 

idet den delvist erstatter naturlig dødelighed, mens den for andre 

populationer hovedsageligt vil være additiv i forhold til den naturlige dødelighed. 

Nogle populationer kommer hurtigt på fode igen, mens det for andre 

kan gå meget langsomt, afhængig af deres livsstrategi og populationsstatus. 

Arter der er sårbare overfor olie og som samtidig udsættes for fangst, kan 

påvirkninger fra olien reduceres ved af forvalte fangsten på en mere restriktiv 

og bæredygtig måde. Mangel på effektive afværgeforanstaltninger i isdækkede 

farvande og den ofte afsides beliggenhed, vil forværre den kritiske 

situation ved et oliespild. 

For dette vurderingsområde er offshore områderne opdelt i otte områder, 

som hver især er klassificeret i forhold til deres sårbarhed overfor oliespild. 

Analysen er baseret på arternes eller artsgruppernes hyppighed, arts- eller 

bestandsspecifikke sårbarhedsværdier overfor olie, estimerede opholdstider 

for olien (oil residency), resurse udnyttelse og enkelte andre parametre. 

Gennem alle årstider er de mest kystnære offshore områder, cirka svarende 

til kontinentalsoklen, blandt de mest sårbare områder. Disse er meget vigtige 

for migrerende og overvintrende havfugle, som fiskeområder for rejer og 

krabber og som fourageringsområde for bardehvaler. Om foråret og om vinteren 

klassificeres desuden det sydvestlige hjørne af vurderingsområdet som 

meget sårbar overfor oliespild. Det skyldes primært et intensivt hellefisk fiskeri 

og at der i marts og april måned findes yngleområder for klapmyds 

langs kanten af vestisen. 

25

26 

En sammenligning af årstider, baseret på absolutte sensitivitetsværdier og 

gennemsnitsværdier for alle offshore områder, viser at vinteren er den mest 

sårbare periode, tæt efterfulgt at forår og efterår, mens sommeren er mindst 

sårbar overfor oliespild. Den primære grund til denne forskel er de store forekomster 

af migrerende/overvintrende havfugle gennem forår, vinter og 

efterår. Havfugle er generelt meget sårbare overfor olie, særligt alkefugle og 

havænder. 

Det kystnære område i vurderingsområdet er særlig sårbart, fordi olien her 

kan påvirke områder med høj biodiversitet. Sårbarheden skyldes også at olien 

kan blive fanget i bugter og fjorde, hvor høje og giftige koncentrationer af 

olie kan opstå. Der vil være risiko for negativ påvirkning af gydende fisk 

som lodde og stenbider om foråret, fjeldørred som samles foran elvene og 

mange havfuglepopulationer - både om sommeren, i trækperioder og særligt 

om vinteren hvor havfugle fra mange steder i Nordatlanten samles i Sydvestgrønland. 

Langtidspåvirkninger kan forekomme i det kystnære område, 

såfremt olien indlejres i sedimentet, mellem sten, i muslingebanker eller i 

klippesprækker. Fra sådanne olieaflejringer kan olien langsomt sive og forårsage 

en kronisk forurening der kan vare ved i årtier. I Prince William Sund 

i Alaska har sådanne olieaflejringer haft negative langtidseffekter for de fugle 

der udnytter de forurenede kyster og nogle arter er endnu ikke kommet 

på fode igen. Det kystnære område er også meget vigtigt for de lokale fiskere 

og fangere og i tilfælde af et oliespild, kan deres aktiviteter blive markant 

påvirket af forbudszoner og ændrede fordelingsmønstre blandt fangstdyrene. 

Turistindustrien vil også blive negativ påvirket af et oliespild i det kystnære 

område. 

I den nordlige og vestlige del af vurderingsområdet er vinteren og foråret en 

kritisk periode pga. Vestisens udbredelse. Ved et oliespild i isfyldt farvand 

vil olien indledningsvist blive fanget mellem isflagerne og i små hulrum på 

isflagernes underside. Isen vil i første omgang være med til at begrænse udbredelsen 

af et oliespild, men da isen holder på olien kan den også transportere 

den over lange afstande (uden væsentlig nedbrydning) og kan således 

påvirke miljøet, f.eks. havfugle og havpattedyr, langt fra det oprindelige udslip. 

Olien kan også blive fanget langs iskanten eller i israndzonen, hvor der 

kan forekomme store og sårbare koncentrationer af primærproduktion, havfugle 

eller havpattedyr. 

Generelt forebygges oliespild bedst ved nøje planlægning og brug af standardiserede 

sikkerhedsprocedurer (HSE), forsigtighedsprincipper (BEP, 

BAT) og internationale standarder (OSPAR). Den foreliggende viden om 

oliespilds adfærd og skæbne i isdækkede farvande er dog begrænset og den 

tilgængelige teknologi til bekæmpelse af olie i isdækket farvand er endnu 

utilstrækkelig. 

Primærproduktion og zooplankton 

Det vurderes, at påvirkningerne på primærproduktion og zooplankton fra et 

overfladespild i det åbne hav vil være lav i vurderingsområdet på grund af 

den store udbredelse i tid og rum af disse forekomster. Der er imidlertid en 

risiko for en negativ påvirkning (nedsat produktion) på primærproduktionen 

lokalt og forårsperioden med algeopblomstring vil være den mest sårbare 

periode. 

Erfaringer fra olieudslippet fra Deepwater Horizon i den Mexicanske Golf i 

2010, hvor store og spredte undersøiske lommer af olie forekom på forskellig

dybde, kan muligvis ændre på konklusionen om primærproduktion og 

zooplankton, såfremt et lignende stort undersøisk olieudslip skulle ske i 

vurderingsområdet. Det er dog endnu for tidligt at drage konklusioner på 

baggrund af uheldet i den Mexicanske Golf, idet den tilgængelige videnskabelige 

information herfra endnu er begrænset. Det er dog givet, at et stort 

undersøisk olieudslip på størrelse med det i den Mexicanske Golf, må forventes 

at have større påvirkninger end et overfladesplid, for primærproduktionen, 

zooplankton og fiske/reje-larver. 

Fisk og krebsdyr larver 

Generelt er æg og larver fra fisk og krebsdyr mere sårbare overfor olie end 

de voksne individer og bestandene kan potentielt blive påvirket med reduceret 

rekruttering og efterfølgende konsekvenser for bestandsstørrelser og 

fiskeriudbytte i en årrække. Atlantisk torsk er særlig sårbar, fordi dens æg 

og larver kan være koncentreret i de øverste 10 m af vandsøjlen, hvorimod 

f.eks. larver af rejer og hellefisk normalt går dybere og derfor er mindre udsat 

overfor skadelige koncentrationer af olie på havoverfladen. Et meget 

stort undersøisk udslip med store lommer af olie fordelt i vandsøjlen, kan 

dog eksponere æg og laver overfor olie i store områder og dybdeintervaller 

og kan potentielt påvirke rekrutteringen og bestandsstørrelsen af arter som 

rejer, hellefisk, krabber og tobis. 

Bundfauna 

Bundlevende organismer som muslinger og krebsdyr er sårbare overfor 

oliespild, om end der ikke forventes nogen effekter på det åbne hav, med 

mindre olien synker til bunden. På lavt vand (< 10-15 m) kan høje toksiske 

koncentrationer af olie nå havbunden, med mulige konsekvenser for den lokale 

bundfauna og de arter der udnytter disse, særligt almindelig ederfugl, 

kongeederfugl, havlit, remmesæl og hvalros. Et stort undersøisk olieudslip 

vil også kunne påvirke bunddyrene på dybt vand. 

Voksne fisk 

Der forventes ikke påvirkninger fra et overfladespild på voksne fisk i det 

åbne hav. Et stort undersøisk ’blow-out’ vil derimod godt kunne ramme pelagiske 

og bundlevende fisk langt til havs, enten direkte eller indirekte gennem 

fødekæden. Hellefisk vil være udsat på begge måder, idet de bevæger 

sig op fra havbunden for at søge føde i de pelagiske vandmasser. Situationen 

er mest kritisk for det kystnære område, hvor store og toksiske koncentrationer 

af olie kan opbygges i beskyttede bugter og fjorde og resultere i høj 

dødelighed blandt fiskene (se ovenstående). 

Fiskeriet 

Et oliespild på det åbne hav vil primært påvirke fiskeriet gennem midlertidige 

forbudszoner, som skal forhindre fangst af kontaminerede fisk. Varigheden 

af sådanne forbudszoner vil afhænge af varigheden af olieudslippet, 

vejret og andet. Udenskærsfiskeriet efter hellefisk er stort i vurderingsområdet 

og eventuelle forbudszoner vil sandsynligvis også omfatte canadiske fiskeområder 

vest for vurderingsområdet. Dette skyldes, at hellefisk kan bevæge 

sig over store afstande på forholdsvis kort tid og der er således risiko 

for, at kontaminerede fisk (med afsmag – ”tainted”) fanges langt fra det oprindelige 

olieudslip. 

Vurderingsområdet er også et af de vigtigste fiskeområder i Grønland for rejer 

og krabber. Forbudszoner kan ligeledes medføre betydelige økonomiske 

tab for dette fiskeri. 

27

28 

Oliekontaminerede kyster vil også medføre nedlukning af fiskeriet i kortere 

eller længere periode. Der er eksempler på mange måneders fiskeforbud 

som konsekvens af oliespild, særligt hvis olien er indlejret i sedimentet eller 

strandkanten. Det kommercielle kystnære fiskeri går primært efter stenbider 

og lokale bestande af torsk, mens lodde primært fanges til privat forbrug. 

Havfugle 

Havfugle er meget sårbare overfor olie i det marine miljø, idet de normalt 

tilbringer meget tid på havoverfladen, hvor de fleste oliespild sker og hvor 

olien typisk spredes. Sårbarheden er knyttet til deres fjerdragt, som blot ved 

meget små mængder olie mister deres isolations- og opdriftsevne. Kontaminerede 

fugle dør som oftest af underafkøling, sult, drukning eller pga. forgiftning. 

I vurderingsområdet er det kystnære område særligt sårbart, fordi 

der forekommer store koncentrationer af fugle det meste af året. En betydelig 

del af disse fugle, inklusiv ynglefugle, fældefugle og overvintrende fugle, 

er knyttet til habitater i den yderste skærgård. Et olieberedskab er vanskeliggjort 

i sådanne områder pga. den afsides beliggenhed, en kompleks kystmorfologi 

og ofte barske vejrbetingelser. De mest sårbare arter er de havfugle 

med en langsom reproduktionsevne, et karaktertræk for mange alkefugle, 

mallemukker og havænder. Arter som polarlomvie, søkonge, ederfugle og 

havlit overvintrer i vurderingsområdet i stort tal, idet området er en del af et 

internationalt vigtigt overvintringsområde (åbentvandsområdet i Sydvestgrønland) 

for havfugle fra hele Nordatlanten. 

Om efteråret og om vinteren er nogle arter af havfugle fra vurderingsområdet 

også i risiko for olieforurening længere til havs, inklusiv fiskebankerne, 

om end fuglene på det åbne hav sædvanligvis er mere spredte end i det 

kystnære område. Nogle af de vigtige arter er mallemuk, ride, lunde, søkonge, 

polarlomvie, tejst og kongeederfugl. Blandt disse er kongeederfugl den 

mest sårbare art, idet den samles i store tætte flokke på fiskebankerne om 

vinteren (Fyllas Banke og Store Hellefiskebanke). Et stort oliespild i disse 

områder kan decimere population. 

Havpattedyr 

Isbjørne og sælunger er blandt de mest sårbare havpattedyr overfor den direkte 

kontakt med olie og kun en begrænset eksponering kan være dødelig, 

idet olien påvirker pelsens isolationsevne. Sælunger er meget relevante for 

vurderingsområdet (se nedenstående), mens isbjørne forekommer i varierende 

grad, afhængig af pakisens udbredelse i Davisstrædet. 

Hvaler, sæler og hvalrosser kan påvirkes af oliespild på havoverfladen. Bardehvalerne 

kan få barderne indsmurt i olie og derved indtage olien med deres 

føde. Det kan påvirke filtreringsevnen eller føre til forgiftning og skader i 

maveregionen. De risikerer også at indånde oliedampe og at få olie i øjnene. 

I hvilken grad havpattedyr aktivt kan undgå at komme i kontakt med en 

oliepøl og samtidig hvor skadelig olien er for de ramte individer, er usikkert. 

Observationer indikerer imidlertid, at i det mindste nogle arter ikke opfatter 

olie som en trussel og er gentagne gange set svømme direkte ind i en oliepøl. 

Arter af havpattedyr som kunne blive ramt af et oliespild i vurderingsområdet 

kunne være remmesæl, klapmyds, ringsæl, spættet sæl, grønlandshval, 

narhval, hvidhval, isbjørn, marsvin, hvalros, døgling og kaskelothval. Spættet 

sæl er særlig sårbar fordi den er truet i Grønland, samt klapmyds fordi 

yngleområderne findes i den østlige pakis i Davisstrædet. Havpattedyr som 

fouragerer i området om sommeren inkluderer grønlandssæl, klapmyds,

ingsæl, spættet sæl, finhval, pukkelhval, vågehval, sejhval, marsvin, hvidnæse, 

døgling, kaskelothval og grindehval. Blåhval forekommer sjældent i 

vurderingsområdet, men er sårbar pga. den meget lille population. 

Afværgeforanstaltninger 

Risikoen for uheld og de miljømæssige konsekvenser kan minimeres ved 

brug af høje sikkerhedsforanstaltninger, ved at undgå de mest sårbare perioder 

og områder, ved at implementere effektive beredskabsplaner med adgang 

til passende udstyr og ved brug af sensitivitetsatlas, hvor de mest sårbare 

områder er identificeret. 

Videnshuller og nye undersøgelser 

Der er generelt mangel på information om økologiske komponenter og processer 

i Davisstrædet. En foreløbig identifikation af vidensbehov og videnshuller 

i forhold til en miljømæssig forvaltning og regulering af kommende 

olieaktiviteter i Davis Strædet er at finde i kapitel 12. For at forvalte kommende 

olieaktiviteter behøves der mere viden for at kunne a) vurdere, planlægge 

og regulere aktiviteterne således at påvirkninger minimeres mest muligt; 

b) identificere de mest sårbare områder og herunder, at opdatere de eksisterende 

sensitivitetsatlas for oliespild; c) etablere baseline viden til brug i 

studier før og efter et eventuelt stort oliespild. 

29

30 

Imaqarniliaq kalaallisooq 

Nalunaarut una utaqqiisaagallartumik siumut sammisillugu Davis Strædip 

kalaallinut ataasortaani, erseqqinnerusumik oqaatigalugu 62° aamma 67° N 

akornanni, uuliasiornerup uuliamillu qalluinerup avatangiisinut sunniutissaanik 

nalilersuineruvoq. 

Avatangiisinik nalilersuineq Nationalt Centre for Miljø og Energi (DCE) aamma 

Pinngortitaleriffimmit suliarineqarpoq Aatsitassanut Pisortaqarfik suleqatigalugu, 

Kalaallit Nunaata avataani Davis Strædemi uulisiornissamut akuersissutinik 

amerlanersunik neqerooruteqarfeqarfilernissamik aalajangiinissamut 

ilaatinneqarnissaa siunertaralugu. Naqitat saqqummiunneqareersimasut 

sulilu saqqummiunneqanngitsut, naliliisimanerit pingasut massakkut 

akuersissuteqarfiusunut atatillugu suliarineqarsimasut tunngavigalugit, 

avatangiisini biologiskimillu avatangiisit naliliinermi sammineqarput 

pinngortitami illerssorneqareersut, uumasut nungutaanissamit aarlerinartorsiortinneqartut, 

minngutitsinerup annertussusii aammalu uumasunik isumalluutinik 

iluaquteqarneq ilanngullugit nalilersuineqarpoq. Ullumikkut 

pissutsit eqqartorneqarnerat tunngavigalugu uuliasiornerup kingunerisinnaasai 

nalilersorneqarput. Paasissutissanik amerlanerusunittaaq pissarsisoqarpat 

taava sunniutaasinnaasut nalorninnginnerusumik nalilersorneqarsinnaalersissagaluarpai. 

Neqerooruteqartiit amerlanerusut agguaanneqassagaluarpata pilersaarutaavoq 

misissuinissamut pilersaarusiorneqassasoq ilisimasanik amigaateqarfiit 

immerneqaaatissaannik aammalu avatangiisinut tunngatillugu pilersaarusiornerup 

uuliasiornermullu atatillugu ingerlatat killilersuiffigineqarnissaannik. 

Ilisimasat nutaat avatangiisinik nalilersuinermut nutarrutaassapput taannalu 

tassaassaaq avatangiisinik nalilersuisarnermi aallaavigineqartartussaq 

massakkumut avatangiisinik naliliisarnermut utaqqiisaasumut taartaasusaassaq. 

Nalilersuiffiusoq takutinneqarpoq figur 1.1.1.-imi. Tamanna akuersissuteqarfissatut 

ilimagineqartoq ingerlatat pissutaallutik annertuumik uuliaarluertoqassagaluarpat 

sunnerneqartussaavoq. Anori sarfallu apeqqutaallutik 

uulia killilersukkap takutinneqartup avataanut tissukarsinnaassaaq. 

Nalunaarusiaq Råstofdirektoratimiit piniarneqarsimavoq suliarineqarlunilu 

Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser-nit (DMU) aamma Pinngortitaleriffimmit 

(GN). 

Uuliasiorfimmi ingerlataasartut tamarmiusut naatsumik nassuiarneqarput 

ajornartinnagulu nalilersorneqarlutik misilittakkat malillugit ingerlatat pisartullu 

annertunerusumik avatangiisinut sunniuteqartartut pingaarnerutillugit. 

Kalaallit Nunaannili uuliasiorneq misilittagaqarfigineqanngimmat 

nalilersuinerit tamaani pisunik tunngaveqanngillat allanili maanga assersuunneqarsinnaasunik 

atugaqarfiusuneersuni misilittakkanik tunngaveqarlutik. 

Pingaartumik Alaskami 1989-imi Prince William Sund-imi uuliaarluerujussuarnermut 

tunngatillugu allaatigisarpassuit, norskillu Barentshavimi 

uuliasiornermut (2003) tunngatillugu avatangiisinik naliliineri aammalu Arktisk 

Rådip ”Arctic Oil and Gas Assessment” (Link) tigulaariffigineqarlutik. 

Kiisalu aamma qanittukkut Mexikanske Golf-imi (2010) immap naqqaniit 

uuliamik aniasoorujussuarnermit ilisimasat pissarsiarineqartut, naak

tassannga misilittagarineqalersut suli killeqaraluartut, ilanngussorneqarlutik. 

Uuliasiorfiusussatut naatsorsuutigisami nalilersuiffiup avannarpasinnerusortaani 

kippasinnerusortaanilu silarlukkajunnera sikoqarpallaartarneralu 

pissutigalugit ukiuunerani upernaqqaarneranilu (decemberimiit aprilimut) 

misissuinerit ajornartorsiuteqartarumaartut naatsorsuutigineqarpoq. Uuliasiornivilli 

aallartinneqassagaluarpat ingerlatat ukioq naallugu ingerlanneqartarumaartut 

naatsorsuutigineqarpoq. 

Avatangiisit 

Immap ikerani avatangiisit 

Nalilersuiffimmi pissutsit atuuttut naatsumik nassuiarneqarput oceanografi 

sikullu pissusii salliutillugit. Tamatuma kujasinnerusortaa nalinginnaasumik 

ukioq kaajallallugu sikuuneq ajorpoq, avannamut kippasinnerusortaa 

eqqaassanngikkaanni. Nalilersuiffiup avannarpasinnerusortaa februarip missaaniit 

aprilimut sikuusarpoq. Ilaanneeriarluni tamaani iluliaqartarpoq, pingaartumik 

ukiuunerata naajartornerani upernaakkullu. Ilulissalli Fyllas 

Bankip avannaani qaqutigoortuupput. Tamatumunnga pissutaapput immap 

sarfai, itissutsit assigiinnginnerat aammalu sermit iigartartut ilulialiornerusut 

tamaannga ungasissumiinnerat. 

Kujataata avataani avasissup ikkannersui nalilersuiffimmi pissutsinut assingunerpaapput. 

Tamakkua ikkannerit sakkortuumik sarfartuunerat pissutaalluni 

imaq inuussutissaqarluartoq tamakkunani annertuumik pikialaartinneqarpoq 

taammalu sivisuumik annertuumillu pinngorarnermik pilersitsilluni. 

Ikkannersuit sikoqartaratilluunnit sikuisattuusarput, Store Hellefiskebanki, 

nalilersuiffiup avannarpasinnerusortaaniittoq eqqaassanngikkaanni. 

Ikkannersuarni annertuumik pinngorartitsineq avataani itinerusuni 

pinngoratitsinermut naleqqiullugu qaammatinik arlalinnik sivisunerusarpoq. 

Pissuseq tamaani pingaarutilik alla tassaavoq immap issittumiitup immallu 

kissalaarnerusup naapiffiat. Tamaani aporaaffiusoq tappiorarnartunut 

assigiinngitsunik, ilaatigut nerisassat takkussorneratigut taamalu pilersitsinerup 

siulliup tulliatalu qanoq annertutiginerannut planktoneqarneranullu 

sunniuteqartarpoq. Aammalumi imaq tarajoq sinerissap qanittuaniittoq sananeqaatimigut 

akuugaanermigullu avataata imaanit immikkoortinneqartarpoq, 

taannami nunamit qanitaminiit imermik akoorneqartarmat. 

Nalilersuiffigineqartoq issittorsuup kujatinnguaniippoq, subarktiskiusumiilluni. 

Avasissumi immap ikerani avatangiisit naammattumik misissorneqarnikuunngillat, 

kisiannili paasissutissat Kalaallit Nunaata eqqaani ikkannersuarni 

aalisarfiusuneersut tunngavigalugit nalilersuiffimmi immap ikerani 

avatangiisit ikittuinnarnik assigiinngisitaartunik uumasoqarput – tamakkuali 

amerlaqalutillu eqimmattorsuusarput, taamalu nerisareqatigiinneq minnerpaaniit 

nerisunut pingaarnernut ta-kisuujunani, artit amerlanngitsut uumasoqatigiinnermi 

aalajangiisuunerullutik. Immami uumasoqatigiinnermi 

pisartoq malunnarnerpaaq tassaavoq upernaakkut tappiorarnartut naasuusut, 

nerisareqatigiinnermi toqqammaviusut, amerleriarujussuartarnerat. Tamakkua 

tappiorarnartunit uumasuusunit nerisarineqartarput, ilaatigullu kingunnit 

Calanus-init (pingaartumik C. finmarchicus) tassaasut immami uumasoqatigiinnermut 

pingaarutilerujussuit ilaat. 

31

32 

Bentisk fauna aamma flora 

Bentiske makrofauna-p pinngorartut ilarparujussui nerisarpai taamaalillutillu 

aamma aalisakkanit, timmissanit imarmiunit miluumasunillu imarmiunit 

pingaaruteqartumik namminneq nerisaallutik. Nalilersuiffimmi mikrofaunamik 

misissuinerit ikittuinnaapput ataatsimullu isigalugu tamakkua qaqugukkut 

amerlassutsikkullu allanngoranerannut, avataanilu najortagaannut tunngatillugu 

ilisimasat amigaatigineqarlutik. Makroalgit sinerissamiittuupput 

manngertumik natilimmiuullutik 50 m sinnerlugu itissusilimmiissinnaasarlutik. 

Biomassi aammalu pinngoraneq ulittarnerup tinittarnerullu naqqaniittoq 

taassumalu avatinnguaniittoq annertuujusinnaavoq taammalu nerisareqatigiinnermi 

pingaarnerpaalluni. Tamakkua mikroalgit uumasuaqqanut 

immap naqqani nipinngasunut nerisaallutillu nerinianut illersuutaallutillu 

parnguttoornissamut, sarfamut mallillu qaartarnerannut imaluunniit 

nerineqarnissamut illersuutaasinnaapput. Pineqartumi mikrolagit assigiinngisitaarnerannut 

artinullu katitigaanerannut, biomassimut, pilersitsinermut 

amerlassutsikkullu allanngorarnerannut tunngatillugu ilisimasat killilerujussuupput 

ilisimaneqanngingajavillutillu. 

Aalisakkat 

Avataasiorfimmi, ikkannersuarnilu aalisakkani natermiut, soorlu qaleralik, 

nataarnaq, suluppaagaq, qeeraq aalisakkallu artit aningaasarsiutigalugit piniarneqanngitsut 

amerlanersaapput. Qaleralik aalisarnermut pingaaruteqaqisoq 

nalilersuiffiup timaani suffisarsorineqarpoq qalerallillu ilanngussortut 

amerlanersaat aamma tamatuma avataaneersuusarlutik (Kalaallit Nunaata 

avannaa kitaa Canadalu). Putooruttut amerlasoorsuullutik ikkannersuarniittartut 

aalisakkanit, timmissanit imarmiunit arfernillu soqqalinnit nerisaalluartuupput. 

Sinerissap qanittuani artit pingaarutillit pingasut suffisarput: 

saarullik, ammassat nipisallu. Ammassak aalisakkat annerusut, timmissat imarmiut, 

miluumasut imarmiut inuillu nerisaattut pingaarutiliuvoq. Saarullik 

nipisalu (suaat) aningaasarsiutigineqarput. Eqaluk aamma artiuvoq sinerissap 

qanittuani pingaarutilik sukisaarsaatigalugu aalisarneqarluartartoq. 

Artit allat annikinnerusumik iluaqutigineqartut, akissarsiutitut imalunniit 

akissarsiutiginagit, tassaapput immap eqalua, nataarnaq qeerarlu. 

Timmissat imarmiut 

Nalilersuiffimi timmissat imarmiut ineqarfippassuaqarput, naak Kitaata avannarpasinnerusuani 

timmissat ineqarfissuisut annertutiginngikkaluartunik. 

Katillugit artit 20-it nalinginnaasumik tamaani erniortuusut naluneqanngilaq 

ineqarfiillu eqimanerpaat sinerissap qerertarpassuiniipput 63˚ aamma 

66˚N-p akornanniittuni, naak tamanna peqqissaartumik timmissanik piaqqiortunik 

misissuiffigineqarsimanngikkaluartoq. Artit marluk kalaallit Nunaanni 

timmissat qaqutigoornerpaat ilagaat, tassalu qilanngat appallu sigguttuut, 

taakkua kalaallit rødlistianni nalunaarsorsimapput ”ulorianartorsiungajalluinnartutut” 

aamma ”nungutaasinnaasutut”. 

Artinut 13-inut nalilersuiffimmiittunut tunngatillugu Kalaallit Nunaannut 

nunanullu allanut pingaarutaat nalilerneqarpoq ”pingaartorujussuusoq”, timmissat 

piaqqiortartut amerlassusiat, isasartut ukiisartullu pissutigalugit 

(Tab. 4.7.1). Nalilersuiffigineqartoq timmissat imarmiut uki-isarfiattut pingaarutilerujussuuvoq. 

Tamassumami ilarujussua Kalaallit Nunaata kujata 

kitaani sikuneq ajortumut, timmissat imarmiut amerlasoorsuit Ruslandimeersut, 

Islandimeersut, Svalbardimeesut Canadameersullu oktoberimiit 

majimut ukiisarfiata ilagaa. Missiliorneqarpoq timmissat 3,5 millionit sinnerlugit 

tamatuma sinerissamut qaninnerusortaannaani ukiisartut. Amerlanerpaat 

tassaapput appat siggukitsut, mitit, mitit siorakitsut appaliarsuillu.

Timmisat imarmiut amerlasoorsuit, qanorli amerlatigineri ilisimaneqanngitsut, 

avataa tamanna inger-laarfigisarluguluunnit ukiivigisarpaat. 

Miluumasut imarmiut 

Miluumasut imarmiut imaani uumasoqatigiinnermi malunnaateqartumik ilaapput. 

Puisit assiginngitsut tallimat nalilersuiffimmiipput, ilaatigut aataat 

amerlasoorsuullutik tamanna tamakkerlugu ukiup annersaani puisaasut, qasigiarlu 

kalaallit rødlistianni ”nungutaanissaa aar-lerinarluinnartutut” nalunaarsorsimasoq. 

Nalilersuiffiup avannarpasinnerusortaa aarrit ukiivigisartagaannut 

pingaarutilimmut ilaavoq. Arfernut ilaapput soqqallit arlallit piffissap 

ilaatigut nalilersuiffimmi takkusimaarajuttut, taakkununnga ilaallutik 

tikaagulliit, tikaagulliusaat, qipoqqaat sejhvalillu. Tamanna neriniarfiannut 

ilaavoq arferillu takkusimaarfigisartagaat amerlanertigut neriniagaasa pingaarnerit 

takkusi-maarnerannut atasarpoq: ammassat, isituuaqqat putooruttullu. 

Arfiviit tamaana ingerlaarfeqaramik januar-februar tamaanaqquttarput 

immaqalu nalilersuiffiup tamatuma avannannguani erniortarlutik. Arferit 

kigutilli arlallit tamaani nalinginnaapput, ilaatigut niisat, niisarnat, anarnat 

aarluarsuillu. Kujasinnerusumi qilalukkat qaqortat qernertallu ukiisarfiat 

nalilersuiffiup avannarpasinnerusortaanut atavoq. 

Kippasinnerusortaani ukiukku upernaakkullu nanoqartarpoq, tassani apeqqutaasarluni 

kitaata sikuata qanoq Davis Strædemut siaruarsimatiginera. 

Piniarneq iluaquteqarnerlu 

Uumasut isumalluutit tamaani tamarmi inunnit iluaqutigineqarput; annikinnerusumik 

sunngiffimmi piarneq inuussutissarsiutigalugulu pinartuuneq 

sinerissami tamarmi ingerlanneqarpoq, annertuumilli iluanaarniutigalugu 

aalisarneq avataasiorluni ingerlanneqarluni. Sinerissap qanittua ukioq kaajallallugu 

sikuuneq ajormat ukioq tamaat piniarnermut periarfissarissaarpoq, 

naak piffissap ilaatigut piniaqqusaanngiffeqaraluartoq. Timmissat imarmiut 

isumalluutinut pingaarnerpaanut ilaapput ikigisassaanngitsunillu pisaqarfiusarlutik. 

Appat mitillu piumaneqarnerpaapput 2008-milu nalilersuiffimmi 

35.000-inik 11.000-inillu pisaasunik nalunaarutaasimallutik. Puisit aamma amerlasuunik 

pisaqarfiusarput. Amii tunineqartarput Kujataanilu ammerivimmi 

suliaralugit nunani allani niuerfinnut tuniniagassiarineqartarlutik, neqaalli 

nammineq nerisarineqartarpoq. Puisini pingaarnerpaavoq aataaq ukiumut 

30.000 missiliorlugit nalunaarsuiffimmi pisaralugu nalunaarutigineqartartoq. 

Aaveq, qilalukkat qaqortat qernertallu ukiukkut upernaakkulllu 

pisarineqartarput pisassiisarnikkullu killilersorneqarlutik. Niisat, tikaagulliit, 

tikaagulliusaat qipoqqaallu tamaani pisarineqartarput, siullit taakkua 

marluk pisaasartunit amerlanersaallutik. Tikaagulliit, tikaagulliusaat qipoqqaallu 

pisassiissutigineqartarput IWC-mit aalajangerneqartartumik. Nannut 

amerlanngitsunik, nalilersuiffiup avannarpasinnerusortaani pisaasarput 

pisassiissutitigut killilersorneqartumik. 

Iluanaarniutigalugu aalisarneq Kalaallit Nunaanni inuussutissarsiutini pingaarnerpaavoq, 

2009-milu Kalaallit Nunaata nunanut allanut niuernikkut 

isertitaasa 88 %-iinik (1.7 milliard DKK) isertitsissutaasimalluni. Qalerallit, 

kinguppaat saattuallu nalilersuiffimmi aningaasarsiutigalugit iluaqutigineqarput 

Kalaallit Nunaannilu ukiumut pisaasartut tamarmiusut ilarparujussui 

tamaani pisarineqartarput. Saarullinniarneq ukiuni qulikkuutaani kingullerni 

annertusiartorpoq, saarulliilli nutaanik ilaartornerat assut allanngorardluni. 

Siusinnerusumut (1960-ikkunnut) naleqqiullugu ullumikkut saarullittarineqartartut 

ikittuarasuupput; 2009-10-mi avataasiorluni saarullinniarneq 

nalilersuiffimmi matoqqatinneqarpoq. Sinerissap qanittuani annertunngitsumik 

aalisarneqarpoq, aliikkutaralugu akissarsiutigaluguluunniit, soor- 

33

34 

lu nipisat, qeeqqat, suluppaakkat, saarulliit, uukkat, ammassat, eqaluit kapisillillu 

aalisarneqarlutik. 

Takornariartitsineq Kalaallit Nunaanni ingerlataavoq annertusiartortoq massakkullu 

nuna tamaat isigalugit inuussutissarsiutinut annerpaanut pingajuulersimasoq. 

Takornariat 2008-mi 82.000-isimapput (imalunniit unnuinerit 

250.000), taakkualu amerlanersaasa nalilersuiffik, pingaar-tumillumi Nuuk 

tikeraarsimavaat. Umiarsuillu takornarianik angallassisut takornariat amerliartuinnartut 

tikittalernerannut ilapittuutaasimapput. Sinerissap qanittua 

takornariartitsinermut pingaaruteqarluinnartuuvoq. 

Klimap allanngorneri 

Klimap allanngornerisa immami uumasoqatigiinneq annertuumik sunnersinnaavaat, 

minnerunngitsumillu issittumiitut. Artit pingaarnerit sumut agguataarsimanerisa 

eqimassusiisalu nerisareqatigiinnermi allanngorneri annertoorujussuarmik 

uumasoqatigiit aaqqissuussimanerannut kinguneqarsinnaapput, 

taakkununngami ilaasuummata. Piniarneq aalisarnerlu qularnanngilluinnartumik 

sunnerneqartussaapput. Uumasoqatigiit ilaannut klimap 

allanngorneri ilungersuatitsinngitsoornavianngillat, soorlu piniarnikkut aamma 

ilungersuatinneqartartut, taammalu kingunerissallugu uuliaarluernernut 

suli misikkarinnerulerneq. Ummasoqatigiit allat takkusimanerulersinnaallutillu 

uuliaarluernermut akiuulluarnerulersinnaapput klimap allanngornerisa 

kinguneranik. Kiisalu ilimanarpoq artit katitigaanerat allanngorumaartoq, 

artimmi ilaat tammarumaarmata allallu takullutik siammarsimaffiata 

avannarpariartornerata kinguneranik. 

Mingutitsissutit 

Mingutitsissutinut, soorlu kulbrintinut saffiugassanullu oqimaatsunut, qanoq 

annertutigisumik akooreernerannut tunngatillugu uuliasiornermut atatillugu 

avatangiisinut ajoqusiisinnaanerat sunniutigisinaasaallu eqqarsaatigalugit 

ilisimasat pingaarutilerujussuupput. 

Kalaallit Nunaanni mingutitsissutit ilaat, taakkununnga ilaallutik organoklorider, 

suli annertujaarujussuupput tamakkua ungasissumiit Issittumut 

ingerlaartarnerat pissutaalluni. Tamakkua annertunerupput uumasoqatigiinni 

nerisaqarnikkut qaffasinnerusumik inissisimasuni, soorlu arferni nannunilu. 

Kiisalu mingutitsissutit sivisuumik sunniusimasartut nutaat massakkut 

uuttorneqarsinnaalersimapput, soorlu ikuallannaveeqqutit bromeriusut. 

Umiarsualiviit qanittuilu eqqaassanngikkaanni uuliamut attuumasut, 

PAH-t ilanngullugit, annertugisassaanngillat tamaaneereersutullu isigisariaqarlutik. 

Kalaallit Nunaanni uumassusilinni immamiittuni, tassa nalilersuiffik ilanngullugu, 

mingutitsissutit suli annertugisassaanngillat. Pingaartumik mingutitsineq 

tamakkualu uumassusilinnut sunniutigisinnaasaat, peqqinnissamut 

piginnaasanillu annikillissutaasinaasut eqqarsaatigalugit sunniutigisinaasaat 

ilannngulugit tassani pineqarput. Assigiinngitsut tamakkua misikkariffigineqassusiannik 

aammalu nalunaarsuinermi periaatsinut tulluassusiannut 

tunngatillugu annertunerusumik ilisimasaqarnissaq pisariaqartinneqarportaaq. 

Ingerlatanik naliliineq 

Naliliinerit makkua ullumikkut artit agguataarsimanerannut, uuliamut tunngatillugu 

ingerlatanut nalinullu killigititanut qanoq tigusisarnerat aamma-

lu klimami pissutsinut atuutunut tunngatillugu ilisimasanik tunngaveqarput. 

Klimalli allanngorneri nalilersuiffimmi avatangisinik annertuumik allanngortitsiumaartut 

ilimagineqarpoq, taamaattumik oqaatigineq ajornarpoq 

naliliinerit ukiuni qulikkuutaani aggersuni aamma atuukkumaarnersut. 

Aammami nalilersuiffiusup ilarujussua iluamik misissuiffiunikuunngilaq 

taamaattumillu ilisimalikkat nutaat naliliinernik allanngortitsisinnaapput. 

Ujarlerneq 

Ujarlernikkut ingerlatat utaqqiisaannaasarput ukiualunni ingerlagajuttut aammalu 

akuersissutaateqarfimmi sumi tamaani ingerlanneqarumaartut. Uuliamik 

iluaqutigineqarsinnaasumik nassaartoqanngippat taava ingerlatat 

taamaattut univittussaapput. Uuliamilli nassaartoqarpat taava ingerlatat ineriartortitsininngorlutillu 

uuliaqarfimmik iluaquteqarninngussapput (ataaniittoq 

takuuk). 

Ujarlernikkut ingerlatat sunniutaat tassaasinnaapput ingerlatat nipiliorneri 

(assersuutigalugu sajuppillatitsisarluni misissuinerit, immap naqqani qillerinerit 

helikopterpalunnerlu), qillerinermi aniatitsinermilu. Sunniutit annertunerusut 

pinngitsoorneqarsinnaapput illersuutaasunik iliuuseqarnikkut, 

soorlu misikkariffiuallaartumi ingerlatsinaveersaarnikkut imaluunniit piffissap 

ilaatigut ingerlatisannginnikkut. 

Artinit tamaaniittunit sajuppillatitsisarluni misissuinerup nipiliortitsineranut 

arferit soqqallit misikkarinnerupput (tikaagullik, tikaagulliusaaq, sejhval 

qipoqqarlu) aamma arferit kigutillit, soorlu kigutilissuit anarnallu. Tamakkua 

aasaanerani najortakkaminnit pingaarutilinnit nujutinneqarsinnaapput. 

Arferit qimagutitaanerat siammartinneqarneralluunniit piniartunit pisariuminarnerannik 

akornusiisinnaapput najortuartarsimasaat piniarnermut pingaaruteqartuusimappata. 

Qilalukkat qernertat, qaqortat, arfiviit aarrillu aamma 

immami sajuppillatitsisarnikkut nipiliornermit sunneruminartuupput, 

kisiannili najortagaat annikitsuinnarmik sajuppillatitsisarluni misissuiffimmut 

ilaavoq. 

Sajuppillatitsisarluni misissuinerit qaangiukkumaarmata tamakkua, uumasoqatigiinnut 

ataasiaanarluni misissuinerit sivisuumik sunniusimanissaat ilimanarpallaanngilaq. 

Aarlerinarsin-naavorli misissuinerit taamaattut arlallit 

ataatsikkut ingerlanneqarpata, imaluunniit misissuinerit sivisuumik imaluunniit 

ukiuni arlalinni ajoqutaasinnaaffimmi ingerlanneqarpata pisut assigiinngitsut 

ataatsimut sunniutaat (kumulative effekter) pilersinnaammata. Misissuinerit 

immikkut ittut 3D-sajuppillatitsisarluni misissuinerit, amerlanertigut 

sumiiffinni annikkinnerusuni atorneqartartut, annertunerumik ajoqusiigallarsinnaapput 

qaangiukkumaartunilli. 

Aalisarnermut atatillugu sajuppillatitsisarluni nipiliornerup ajoqusiisinnaanera 

qaleralinnut annertuneruvoq. Taakkuami tatamitillugit nigortikkallarneqarsinnaapput 

(ullualunni sapaatip akunneriniluunniit) taamalu aalisarfinni 

pisakinnerulernermik kinguneqarluni. Qalerallit sumerpiaq suffisarnerat 

erseqqivissumik tikkuarneqarsinnaanngikkaluartoq suffinerisa nalaani sajuppillatitsisarluni 

misissuinerit pinaveersarnissaat inassutigineqassaaq (ukiuleqqaasaani). 

Kinguppanik saattuanillu aalisarneq sunnerneqassagunanngilaq. 

Qilleriveqarfinni nipiliorneq aamma qaangiuttussaavoq, najukkalli ilaanni 

sajuppillatitsisarluni misissuinermit aalaakkaanerusumik ingerlanneqaru- 

35

36 

maarlutik. Nalilersuiffimmi artit misikkarinnerit tassaapput arferit aarrillu. 

Arferit nuuffigineqarsinnaasumik najugassaqassappata ingerlatat tamakkua 

ajortumik kinguneqarnissaat ilimagineqanngilaq, qilleriveqarfiilli arlallit ataatsikkut 

misissuiffimmi ingerlassappata tamanna kumulative effektinik 

aammalu arferit nuuffigisinnaasaraluaminnit nujutsinneqarnerannik kinguneqarsinnaasoq 

aarlerigineqarsinnaavoq. 

Maralluk qillerinermi atorneqartoq qillernerlukullu immap naqqanut aniatinneqartut 

immap naqqata uumasuinut sunniuteqarsinnaavoq. Ilimagineqarpoq 

nalilersuiffiusumi aniatitsivippiaannarnut sunniuteqarumaartoq qillerinermi 

maralluit avatangiisinut ajoqutaannginnerusut atorneqarpata. Sumiiffinnili 

misikkarinneruni misiliilluni qillerisoqarnissaa sapinngisamik pinngitsoorniarluinnartariaqarpoq. 

Qillerisoqalersinnagu qilleriviusussami tunngaviusumik 

misissuineqartariaqarpoq tamaani pissutsit aartilluunniit immikkoorluinnartut 

uppernarsaaser-sornissaat siunertaralugu, artit soorlu immap 

nillertup koralii imaluunniit svampeqarfiit, annertunerusumik qallersuinermit 

navianartorsiortineqarnerat annertusisinnaammat. Qillerinerup 

kingornagut misissuinerit uppernarsassavaat malunnaatilinnik sunniuteqarsimanersoq. 

Misissuilluni qillerinerit ingerlataapput nukimmik piariaqartitsisorujussuit 

tamatumalu kingunerissavaa annertuumik naatisiviup gassiinik aniatitsineq. 

Qillerinerup ataasiinnarluunniit kalaallit gassinik tamakkuninnga aniatitsinerat 

malunnaatilimmik annertusitittussaavaa. 

Kiisalu misissuilluni qillerinerup uuliamik aniasoornikkut uuliakoorsinnaaneq 

(”blow-out”) aarlerinartoraa (ataaniittoq takuuk). 

Ujarlernermi akuerineqarsinnaanngitsunik avatangiisinik sunniinerit pinaveersaarneqarsinnaapput 

avatangiisinik misissuinerit tunngavigalugit peqqissaartumik 

pilersaarusiornikkut ”Best Available Technique” (BAT) aamma 

”Best Environmental Practice” (BEP) malillugit mianersortumik ingerlatsigaanni 

nunallu assigiinngitsut piumasaqaataat (OSPAR) malillugit suligaanni, 

assersuutigalugu sumiiffinni misikkarissuni piffissanilu aalajangersuni. 

Ineriartortitsineq tunisassiornerlu 

Ineriartortitsineq tunisassiornikkullu ingerlatat nalilersoruminaatsuupput 

sumiiffissaat qanorlu annertutiginissaat ilisimaneqanngimmat. Sunniutinut 

nalinginnaasumik ingerlatat qassiunerat, qanoq tamaani imminnut ungasitsiginerat 

qanorlu sivisutigisumik ingerlanneqarnerat apeqqutaasussaavoq. 

Tassunga atatillugu pingaartuuvoq ataatsimoortumik sunniutissaasa nalilersorneqarnissaat. 

Piiaanermut, tunisassiornermut assartuinermullu atatillugu ingerlatat sivisuujusarput 

(ukiunik qulikkuutaartunik sivisussusillit) aammalu ingerlatat 

arlaqartut ajorluinnartumik avatangiisinik sunniisinnaapput. 

Aniatitsinerit 

Ineriartortitsinerup tunisassiornerullu nalaanni qillerinerit ingerlassapput 

aammalu maralluk qillerinermut atorneqartoq qillernerlukullu ujarlenerup 

nalaaniit annertunerujussuarmik aniatinneqassallutik. Aniatitat sapinngisamik 

annikillisarneqartariaqarput, atoqqittarnerisigut aammalu piiarnerlukut 

uterartinnerisigut taamaallaallu kemikaliat avatangiisinut ajoqutaanngitsut 

aniatinnerisigut (assersuutigalugu ”qorsuit” ”sungaartullu”), issittumi

toqunartoqarneri arrortikkuminarnerilu misiligarneqareersimasut kisimik 

atorneqartariaqarput. Kemikalianik ”qernertunik” atuinissaq Kalaallit Nunaanni 

inerteqqutaavoq kemikaliallu ”aappaluttut” taamaallaat atorneqarsinnaapput 

immikkut akeritissimagaanni. Aniatitat toqunartuunngitsut immap 

naqqani aserorternerit angisusiisa agguataarsimanerat allanngortissinnaavaat 

aammalu aniatitsiviusup qanittuani uumasut natermiut sunnersinnaallugit. 

Aniatitalli isumakuluutigineqarnerusut tassa tunisassiornermi imeq 

atorneqartoq (uuliamut ilanngullugu pumperlugu qallorneqartoq) 

uuliaminernik akoqarsinnaammat. Misisuinerit nutaanerusut 

maluginiarpaat uuliamineerannguit timmissat, aaalisakkat pinngorartullu 

sunnertaraat. Sunniutit taamaattut pinngitsoortinnissaannut periusissaq 

piukkunnarnerpaaq tassaavoq erngup tunisassiornermi atorneqartup 

pitsaanerusumik saleqqaarlugu iginneqartarnissaa, imaluunniit suli 

pitsaanerussagaluarpoq imeq utertillugu qillikkamut 

utertinneqartartuuppat, soorlu Lofoten-Barentshavemi tamanna 

atorneqartoq. 

Erngup umiarsuit ballasterisimataata aniatinneqarneranut atatillugu arlerinarpoq 

uumasut maanimiunngitsut eqqunneqarnisaat aammami maaniittut 

qerliinnarlugit amerliartortartunik eqqussuissutaasinnaammat. 

Taamaattumik imeq ballasterineqarsimasoq suliarineqartariaqarpoq peqqussutillu 

aalajangersut malillugit aniatinneqartariaqarluni. Tamanna suli 

imatorsuaq Issittumi ajornartorsiutaanngikkaluarpoq. Kisiannii aarlerinartua 

annertusiartortussaavoq klimap allanngorneri uuliamillu tunisassiorfimmik 

pilersoqarpat umiarsuit uuliamik assartuutit amerliartornerat peqatigalugu. 

Uuliasiorfimmik ineriartortitsineq uuliamillu tunisassiorneq nukissarujussuarmik 

atuisuupput ingerlatallu taamaattut Kalaallit Nunaata naatitsiviup gassiinik 

aniatitsineranut annertuumik ilapittuutaasussaapput. Norgemi uuliasiorferujussuit 

ilaat ataaseq ullumikkut Kalaallit Nu-naata tamarmiusup 

CO2 –mik aniatitaata marloriaataanik aniatitsivoq. 

Pisorpaluk 

Qillerinernit atortullu inissititernerisa nipiliornerat ineriartortitsinerup tunisassiornerullu 

nalaani ingerlaannartussaavoq, tamannalu arferit aasami najortagaasa 

annaaneqarnerannik tamakkualuunniit illikarnerannik kinguneqarsinnaavoq, 

pingaartumik tunisassiorfiit arlallit ataatsikkut ingerlanneqassappata. 

Umiarsuit (sikunik aserorterutit ilanngulugit) helikopterillu nipiliornerat 

ujarlernerup nalaaniit atamaarnerulersussaasoq maluumasunik imarmiunik 

timmissanillu imarmiunik sunniisinnaavoq. Artit nalilersuiffimmi 

eqqoruminarnerit tassaapput timmissat amerlasoorsuullutik piaqqiortartut, 

arfiviit, qilalukkat qernertat, qaqortat, tikaagulliit, tikaagulliusaat, niisat 

aarrit – artit nipip ulorianartumik nassataqartarneranik ilisimasallit, soorlu 

aallaaniarnermiit. Qangaanilli piniarfiusartut aamma sunnerneqarsinnaapput. 

Timisartut aalajangersukkut qutsissutsikkullu aalajangersukkut timmisarnerisigut 

helikopterip nipiliornerisa sunniutaat annikillisinneqarsinnaapput. 

Atortoqarfiit inissinneqarnerat 

Imaannarmi atortoqarfiit sumut inissinneqarnerat atassuteqaatinillu pilersitsinerup 

qanittumi immap naqqata uumasui sunnersinnaavai neriniarfiillu 

pingaarutillit aserorsinnaallugit – aaveq taama eqqoruminartuuvoq, naak 

taanna nalilersuiffiup avannarpasinnersaani naapitassaanerugaluartoq. Mi- 

37

38 

tit siorakitsut ukiisut neriniarfii ikkannersuarniittut (pingaartumik Fyllas 

Bankimi) aamma misikkarissuupput. Nunami atortulersuutit tamaani timmissat 

erniortut sunnersinnaavaat, eqaluit kuunnut aalajangerssumut 

ajornissaat mattussinnaallugu, sinerissap qanittuani naasut uumasullu aserorsinnaallugit, 

aammalu nunap alianaatsuunera sunnernerlussinnaallugu. 

Kingulleq taanna takornariaqarnermut pingaarutiliuvoq. 

Aalisarnermut immikkut sunniuteqartussat tassaapput isumannaatsuunissaq 

pillugu matusat/tikeqqusaanngitsut (500 m-eriugajuttut) imaannarmi 

atortuugallartut ataavartulluunniit eqqaanni pilersinneqartartut. Tamakkua 

annertuumik qaleralinniarluni kinguppanniarlunilu aalisarfiulluartunut sunniuteqartussaapput. 

Atortulersuutit qaammaqqutillit ikumasullu (gassi ikumasoq) timmissanit 

imarmiunit taartillugu qaninniarneqartarmata, pingaartumik mitit, immaqalu 

appaliarsuit tamakkununnga qaalluitsisarnissaat aarleqqutigisariaqarpoq. 

Pissutsit arlallit ataatsimut sunniutaat (Kumulative effekter) 

Kumulative effektit uuliasiorfinni ingerlatanit tamanit (inunnit pisunik klimallu 

allanngornerinik ilallugit) pisut, ingerlatat qanoq annertutiginissaat 

ilisimatinnagu assut nalilersoruminaapput. Sunniutit suunissaannut apeqqutaassaaq 

ingerlatat qanoq annertutiginerat, ingerlatat qassiunerat tamakkualu 

qanoq sivisutigisumik ingerlanissaat. Naliliinissaq tamakkua ilisimalernissaannut 

utaqqittariaqassaaq. 

Ineriartortitsinerup tunisassiornerullu sunniutaat killilersimaaneqarsinnaavoq 

sukumiisumik avatangiisinik misissuinerit (uumasoqarfiit eqqoruminarnerusut 

sunnerneqarnerannik paasiniaanerit) tunngavigalugit atortoqarfinnik 

assartuillunilu aqqutinik pilersaarusiornikkut. Taamatuttaaq BEP, BAT 

aamma nunat allat immamut silaannarmullu aniatitat millisinniarlugit maleruaqqusaat 

(assersuutigalugu OSPAR aamma HOCNF) atulersinneqartariaqarput. 

Uuliaarluerneq 

Avatangiisit eqqarsaatigalugit ingerlatani qulaani eqqartorneqartuni ajutoorneq 

ajornerpaaq tassaavoq annertoorsuarmik uuliaarluerneq. Uuliaarluerneq 

qillerinerup nalaani pisinnaavoq (”blow-out”) imaluunniit uuliamik 

toqqortuiffimmi assartuinermiluunniit pisinnaalluni. Anertoorsuarmik uuliamik 

aniasoornerit qaqutigoortutut oqaatigisariaqarput, teknikikkummi aaqqiissutissat 

isumannaallisaanikkullu pissut-sit nutarterneqartuarmata. Taamali 

pisoqarsinnaanera aarlerinartuarpoq. 

Davis Strædemi nalilersuiffimmut tunngatillugu uuliamik aniasoqarpat qanoq 

pisoqarnissaanut tunngatillugu pisuusaartitsinermik modellit atorlugit 

misiliisoqarsimanngilaq. 

Uliaarlluerujussuarnerup immaqa uumasoqatigiiffiit tamaasa sunnersinnaavai, 

pinngoratitsivinniit nerisareqatigiinnermi qullerpaanut. Tamanna uumasoqatigiinnik 

artinillu sunniinissamut, ilami immaqa uumasoqatigiinnik 

ataatsinik, ukiuni qulikkuutaani arlalinni atuussinnaasumik aarlerinartorsiutaavoq, 

soorlu Alaskami Prince William Sundet-imi uppernarsarneqartoq. 

Uumasoqatigiit ilaannut tunngatillugu toqusartut taarserneqarsinnaasarput, 

nalinginnaasumik

toqusarnermik taarserneqarluni, uumasulli ilaannut tunngatillugu nalinginnaasumik 

toqusarnermut ilasaataasinnaalluni. Uumasut ilaat sukkasuumik 

siumut saaqqittarput, allalli arriitsuararsuarmik qaangiiniartarlutik qanoq 

uumariaaseqarnerat uumasoqatigiillu qanoq atugaqarnerat tassani apeqqutaalluni. 

Artit uuliamit eqqoruminarnerusut piniarneqartuusullu uuliamit 

sunnerneqarnerat annikillisinneqarsinnaavoq pisaasartut killilersuiffiunerusumik 

ikiliartuutaanngitsumillu aqutsivigineqarneratigut. Pitsaasunik immami 

sikuusartumi pinarveersaartitsisinnaannginneq avinngarusimasumiikkajunnerallu 

uuliaarluerneqartillugu ajornerusumik kinguneqartitsisarpoq. 

Nalilersuiffiusoq tamanna immikkoortunut arfineq pingasunut avitaavoq 

uuliaarluernermit qanoq navianartorsiortinneqarsinnaanerat tunngavigalugu 

immikkoortitikkanik. Misissuineq artit arteqatigiikkuutaalluunniit qanoq 

tamaaniittigisarnerat, artit imaluunniit uumasoqatigiit uuliamit sunneruminarnerat, 

uuliap qanoq sivisutigisumik sumiiffigisinnaasaanik (oil residency) 

isumalluutinik atuinermik aammalu apeqqutinik ataasiakkaanik allanik 

tunngaveqartinneqarpoq. 

Ukiup qanoq ilineratigulluunniit avataani sumiiffiit, tasaanerusut nunaviup 

tunngaveqarfia, eqqoruminarnerpaanut ilaapput. Tamakkuami timmissanut 

imarmiunut ingerlaanut ukiisunullu pingaarutilerujussuupput, kinguppannik 

saattuanillu aalisarfiullutik aammalu arfernit soqqalinnit neriniarfiullutik. 

Upernaakkut ukiuuneranilu nalilersuiffigineqartup kujammut kimmut 

isua uuliaarluernermit assorsuaq navianartorsiortikkuminartutut nalilerneqarpoq. 

Tamatumunnga pissutaavoq annertoorujussuarmik qaleralinniarfiunera 

aammalu martsimi aprilimilu natsersuarnit kitaata sikuata sinaava 

erniorfiummat. 

Ukiup qanoq ilinerisa sanilliussuunneranni misikkarissutsimut uuttuutit piviusut 

aammalu agguaqatigiissitsinerit tunngavigalugit tamanut tunngatillugu 

ingerlanneqartut takutippaat ukiuunera ajoqusiiffigissallugu ajornerpaasoq, 

upernaaq ukiarlu qanittuararsuarmik tulleralugit, aasarli uuliaarluernermit 

taama eqqoruminartiginani. Taama assigiinngisitaarnermut pissuterpiaavoq 

timmissat imarmiut amerlasoorsuullutik ingerlaartut/ukiisut upernaakkut, 

ukiukkut ukiakkullu tamanna najortarmassuk. Ataatsimut isigalugu 

timmissat imarmiut uuliaarluernermit navianartorsiortikkuminartorujussuupput, 

pingaartumik appakkut mitikkullu (havænder). 

Nalilersuiffiusumi sinerissap qanittua immikkut eqqoruminartuuvoq assigiinngitsorpassuarnik 

kangerlunni iterlannilu uumasoqarfiusoq uuliap uniffigisinnaammagu 

uuliap toqunartuinik eqiteriffinngorlugu. Aalisakkat 

suffisut, soorlu ammassat nipisallu upernaakkut, eqaluit kuuit paavini katersuuttartut 

timmissalu imarmiorpassuit ajoquserneqarsinnaapput – aasakkut, 

ingerlaarnermik nalaani pingaartumillu ukiukkut Atlantikup avannaani 

Kalaallit Nunaatalu kitaani kujataani timmiarpassuit katersuuffigisartagaanni. 

Sinerissap qanittuani sivisuumik sunniusima-sinnaavoq uulia kinnerni 

ujaranngortuni, ujaqqat akornanni, uiloqarfinni qaarsullu quppaani 

unissimappat. Uuliaarluerfinni taamaattuni uulia arriitsuinnarmik aniarusaarsinnaavoq 

ataavartumillu mingutitsilersinnaalluni ukiunik qulikkuutaanik 

arlalinnik sivisussuseqarsinnaasumik. Alaskami Prince William 

Sund-imi uuliaarluernerit taamaattut timmissat najortagaat suli ulloq manna 

tikillugu iluarsisimanngillat. Sinerissap qanittua tamaani aalisartunut piniartunullu 

pingaarutilerujussuuvoq, uuliaarluerneqarpallu ingerlataat malunnartumik 

sunnerneqarsinnaapput inerteqquteqarfitsigut piniakkallu najor- 

39

40 

takkaminnik allanngortitsinerannit. Takornariaqarnertaaq sinerissap qanittuani 

uuliaarluernermit ajoquserneqarumaarpoq. 

Nalilersuiffiup avannarpasinnerusortaa kippasinnerusortaalu ukiuunerani 

upernaakkullu kitaata sikoqartarnera pissutigalugu isumakulunnarneruvoq. 

Sikulimmi uuliaarluertoqarneratigut uulia sikut akorninut sikullu ataani ilullisimanernut 

unerarsinnaavoq. Aallaqqaammut sikup uuliaarluerneq siaruatsaaleqqaassavaa, 

uuliali sikumut nipinngammat sumorsuaq sikumit angallanneqarsinnaavoq 

(imatut nungukkiartorani) taamaattumillu avatangiisit, 

soorlu immap timmiai miluumasullu imarmiut uuliaarluerfiusumit ungasissorujussuarmiittut 

sunnernerlussinnaallugit. Uulia aamma sikup sinaavani 

sinaaqarfianiluunniit uninngatinneqarsinnaavoq pinngorarfissuarmi pinngorarnermut 

ajoquseruminartumi, timmissanut imarmiunut miluumasunullu 

imarmiunut ajoqutaalerluni. 

Ataatsimut isigalugu uuliaarluerneq pitsaanerpaamik pinaveersaarneqarsinnaavoq 

pilersaarusiorluarnikkut periaatsinillu isumannaallisaataasunik 

aaqqissuussanik atuinikkut (HSE), mianersortumik pissuseqarnikkut (BEP, 

BAT) aammalu nunani allani peqqussutit (OSPAR) malinneqarnerisigut. 

Immami sikuusumi uuliaarluernerup pissuserisartagaanut tunngatilluguli 

ilisimasat massakkut pigineqartut killeqarput sikuusumilu uuliaarluernerup 

akiorneqarnissaanut teknologi pigineqartoq ullumikkut suli naammanngilaq. 

Pinngorarneq uumasuaqqallu tappiorarnartut 

Naliliineqarpoq imaannarmi immap qaavani uuliaarluernerup sunniutaa 

pingorarnermut uumasuaqqanullu tappiorarnartunut annertuujussaanngitsoq 

tamakkua annertoorujussuarmut siaruarsimanera amerlassusiallu eqqarsaatigigaanni. 

Ajortumilli sunniuteqarsinnaanerat (pinngorarnerup minnerulernissaa) 

sumiiffinni aalajangersuni upernaakkut algenileruttorfiani, 

ajoquseruminarnerpaaffimmi ajoqutaasinnaanera isumakulunnartuuvoq. 

Mexico Golf-imi 2010-mi Macodo-brønden-imi uuliamik aniasoornermit, 

immap iluani itissutsini assigiinngitsuni uuliaminertarujussuit sumorsuaq 

siaruarfigisaannit, misilittakkat malillugit immaqa pinngorarnermut uumasuaqqanullu 

tappiorarnartunut tunngatillugu naliliineq allanngortittariaqarsinnaavaa, 

taamatut ittumik nalilersuiffimmi uuliamik aniasoorneqassagaluarpat. 

Massakkulli Mexicanske Golf-imi ajutoorneq tunngavigalugu inerniliinissaq 

piaarpallaarpoq, tassami tassanngaanniit ilisimatuutut paasissutissiissutit 

suli annertunngeqimmata. Qularutissaanngilarli immap naqqani 

Mexico Golf-imi aniasoornersuartut angitigisumik aniasoorneqassagaluarpat 

ilimagisariaqartoq tamanna immap qaavani aniasoornermit annertunerusumik 

pinngorarnermut, uumasuaqqanut tappiorarnartunut aamma aalisakkanut 

tukerlaa-nut/kinguppaallu piaraannut ajoqusiineq annertunerujussuussagunartoq. 

Aalisakkat peqquillu piaraat tukerlaat 

Ataatsimut isigalugu suaat peqquillu piaraat tukerlaat inersimasuninnganit 

uuliamut misikkarinnerupput, aammalu uumasoqatigiit ilaartortuunerat 

appassutaasumik akornuserneqarsinnaavoq tamannalu ikilinermik 

kinguneqarsinnaalluni ukiuni arlalissuarni aalisarnikkut 

pisakinnerulernermik kinguneqartumik. Saarullik Atlantikormioq 

eqqoruminartorujussuuvoq suaat piaraallu tukerlaat immap qaava 10 m 

angullugu itissusilik najortaramikku, akerlianilli kinguppat qalerallillu 

piaraat tukerlaat itinerusumiittarlutik taamalu immap qaavani

minguttitamiit ajoquserneqarsinnaanerat annikinnerulluni. Immap iluani 

aniasoorujussuarnikkut itissutsini assigiinngitsuni annertoorsuanngorluni 

unerartoq suannut tukerlaanullu itissutsini assigiinngitsuni sunniisinnaavoq 

peqarneranullu, soorlu kinguppannik, qaleralinnik, saattuanik 

putooruttunillu, sunniisinnaalluni. 

Immap naqqata uumasui 

Uumasut natermiut uillut peqquillu uuliaarluernermit eqqoruminartuupput, 

imaannarmili imatut sunniuteqarnissaa ilimagineqanngilaq uulia immap 

naqqanut kivinngippat. Ikkattumi (< 10-15 m) toqunartut uuliamiittut 

immap naqqanut pisinnaapput tamaani naasunut, immap natermiunut uumasunullu 

tamaaniittunut tamakkualu iluaqutaanerannut sunniuteqarnerlussinnaallutik, 

pingaartumik miternut siorartuunut, miternut siorakitsunut, 

allernut, ussunnut aavernullu. Immap naqqaniit annertoorsuarmik aniasoornikkut 

itisuup naqqani uumasut aamma sunnerneqarsinnaapput. 

Aalisakkat inersimasut 

Imaannarmi immap qaavanut aniasoorneq aalisakkanut inersimasunut sunniuteqarnissaa 

ilimagineqanngilaq. Akerlianilli immap naqqani aniasoorujussuarneq 

”blow-out” aalisakkat ikerinnarmiut natermiullu avasiinnarsuarmiittut 

eqqorsinnaavai, toqqaannartumik imaluunniit nerisareqatigiinnikkut. 

Qalerallit taakkuninnga marlunnit sunnerneqarsinnaapput, taakkumi 

immap naqqaniit qaffarterlutik ikerinnarmi nerisassarsiortarput. Sinerissalli 

qanittua aarlerinarnerpaavoq, uuliaminerujussuit toqunartullu tassanngaanneersut 

iterlanni kangerlunnilu unissinnaammata aalisakkat annertuumik 

toqorarnerannik kinguneqartumik (qulaaniittoq takuuk). 

Aalisarneq 

Imaannarmi uuliaarluernerup siullermik aalisarneq eqqussavaa utaqqiisaagallartumik 

aalisarfigeqqusaanngitsutigut, taakkua pilersinneqassapput aalisakkanik 

mingutsinneqarsimasunik pisaqarnissaq pinngitsoortinniarlugu. 

Taamatut matuneqarsimasut qanoq sivisutigisumik matoqqanissaannut apeqqutaavoq 

uuliap anianerata qanoq sivisutiginera, silap pisusii allallu. Avataasiorluni 

qaleralinniarneq nalilersuiffiusumi annertoorujussuuvoq aalisarfigeqqusaanngitsulersuisoqassagaluarpallu 

nalilersuiffiup kitaani Canadami 

aalisarfiit aamma ilaatinneqartussaassapput. Tamatumunnga pissutaavoq 

qaleralik ungasissorsuarmut piffissaq sivisunngitsoq atorlugu nikerartarmat 

taamalu aalisakkat mingutsinneqarsimasut (tipittut – ”tainted”) uuliaarluerfimmit 

ungasissorujussuarmi pisarineqarsinnaallutik. 

Nalilersuiffittaaq Kalaallit Nunaanni kinguppannik saattuanillu aalisarfiit 

pingaarnerpaat ilagaat. Aalisarfigeqqusaanngitsulersuinerup aamma aalisarnerup 

aningaasarsiornikkut annertuumik annaasaqarnera kingunerisinnaavaa. 

Sinerissami uuliamik mingutsinneqarsimasut sivisunerusunik sivikinnerusunilluunniit 

aalisaqqusinnginneq kingunerisinnaavaa. Assersuutissaqarpoq 

uuliaarluerneq pissutaalluni qaammaterpassuarni aalisaqqusiunnaaneqartarmat, 

pingaartumik uuliakoq immap naqqanut sissamullu nipissimatillugu. 

Sinerissap qanittuani inuussutissarsiutigalugu aalisarneq pingaartumik 

najukkani saaqullinniarneruvoq, ammassalli nammineq atugassatut annerusumik 

pisarineqartarluni. 

41

42 

Timmissat imarmiut 

Timmissat imarmiut immami uuliaarluernermit eqqornerlukkuminartorujussuupput, 

piffissammi annersaa immap qaaniittarput uuliaarluerfioqqajaanerpaasartumi 

uuliallu siaruarterfigisartagaani. Meqqoqarnerat ajoquseruminarnerannut 

pissutaavoq, ilami uuliamininnguugaluartulluunniit meqquisa 

oqorsaataanerat puttalatitsinerallu aserorsinnaavaa. Timmissat mingutsinneqartut 

amerlanertigut qiullutik, perlerlutik, ipillutik toqunartulluunniit 

pissutigalugit toqusarput. Nalilersuiffiusumi sinerissap qanittua eqqornerlukkuminarnerpaavoq, 

ukiormi kaajallangajallugu tamaani timmiarpassuaqartarpoq. 

Timmissat tamakkua ilarpassui, piaqqiortut, isasartut ukiisartullu 

ilanngullugit najugannaaqarput qeqertarpassuaqarfimmi. Uuliaarluernissamut 

sillimaniarneq taamaattuni ajornakusoortorujussuusarpoq, 

alimasippallaarneq, sinerissap ilusaa silarlukkajunneralu ilaatigut pissutaallutik. 

Timmissat imarmiut eqqornerlunneqarsinnaanerpaat arriitsumik kinguaassiortuupput, 

tassaallutik appat ilaqutaallu, appaliarsuit, mitit allerillu 

nalilersuiffiusumi amerlasoorsuullutik ukiisartut, tamannami nunanit assigiinngitsuneersunik 

timmissanut imarmiunut ukiiffiuvoq pingaarluinnartoq 

(Kalaallit Nunaat kitaa sikuuneq ajortoq) timmissanit nunanit Atlantikup avannaaneersunit 

tamanit najorneqartarami. 

Timmissat imarmiut ilaat nalilersuifimmeersut ukiakkut ukiuuneranilu avasiinnarmi, 

ikkannersuit aalisarfiit ilanngullugit, uuliaarluernissaat aarlerinartuuvortaaq 

naak timmissat imaannarmiittut sinerissap qanittuaniittunit 

siamasinnerusaraluartut. Artinut pingaatunut tamakkununnga ilaapput malamuit, 

taateraat, qilanngat, appaliarsuit, appat siggukitsut mitillu siorakitsut. 

Taakunannga mitit siorakitsut aarlerinarnerpaapput, amerlasoorsuullutik 

eqimaqalutik ikkannersuarni aalisarfinniittaramik (Fyllas Bankimi, 

Store Hellefiske Bankimi). 

Tamaani uuliaarluerujussuarneq timmissanik taakkuninnga 

nungutsingajalluinnarsinnaavoq. 

Miluumasut imarmiut 

Nannut puisillu piaraat miluumasuni imarmiuni uuliamut atuunnissamut 

aarlerinartorsiornerpaapput, tassami annikitsuinnarmilluunniit uuliaarluerneq 

toqussutigisinnaagamikku, tassa uuliap meqquisa oqorsaataanerat aserortarmagu. 

Puiseeqqat nalilersuiffimmi nalinginnaasorujussuupput (ataaniittoq 

takuuk), nannulli tamaaniittarnerat allanngorarpoq, tassani Davisstrædip 

qanoq sikoqarnera apeqqutaasarluni. 

Arferit, puisit aarrillu immaap qaavani uuliaarluernermit sunnerneqarsinnaapput. 

Arferit soqqallit soqqaat uuliaarluersinnaapput aammalu nerisaminnut 

ilanngullugu uuliamik iioraasinnaallutik. Tamanna soqqaasa nakkartitsissutitut 

atorneranik allannguisinnaavoq, toqunartortorluni naakkullu ajoquteqalerluni 

toqussutaasinnaalluni. Aammalumi uuliap aalaa najuussorsinnaavaat 

isimikkullu uuliaarluersinnaallutik. Miluumasut imarmiut uuliaarluernermik 

namminneerlutik qimatserisinnaanersut aammalu uulia uumasunut 

tamakkununnga mingutsitsisoq qanorpiaq ajorusiitigisarnersoq erseqqissumik 

ilisimaneqanngilaq. Takuneqartartulli tunngavigalugit malunnarpoq 

artit ilaasa uulia aarlerinartutut isiginngikkaat aammalu uuliaarluernermut 

pulaqaqattaartartut takuneqartarlutik. 

Miluumasut imarmiut nalilersuiffimmi uuliaarluernermit eqqorneqarsinnaasut 

tassaapput ussuit, natsersuit, natsiit, qasigissat, arfiviit, qilalukkat qernertat, 

qaqortat, nanoq, niisa, aaveq, anarnaq aamma kigutilissuaq. Qasigiaq

Kalaallit Nunaanni immikkut ulorianartorsiortuuvoq, aamma natsersuaq erniorfii 

Davisstrædip kangisinnerusuani sikuni eqingasuni erniorfeqaramik. 

Miluumasunut imarmiunut tamaani aasakkut neriniartartunut ilaapput aataat, 

natsersuit, natsiit, qasigissat, tikaagulliusaat, qipoqqaat, tikaagulliit, 

sejhvalit, niisat, aarluarsuit, anarnat, kigutilissuit niisarnallu. Tunnulik qaqutigut 

tamaanga nalilersuiffiusumut takkuttarpoq, eqqornerlukkuminartuuvorli 

tunnullit ikittuinnaammata. 

Pinngitsoortitsiniarluni iliuutsit 

Ajutoorsinnaaneq avatangiisinullu kinguneqarnerlussinnaaneq annikillisinneqarsinaapput 

isumannaallisaanikkut annertuumik iliuuseqarnikkut, tassa 

piffissat sumiiffiillu ajoqusiiffiusinnaanerusut atornaveersaarnerisigut, sillimaniarnikkut 

iliuusissat sunniuteqarluartut atorneqarnerigisut aammalu atortunik 

tulluartunik atuinikkut aammalu suut navianartorsiortikkuminarnerusut 

nalunaarsorsimaffiannik atuinikkut. 

Ilisimasat amigaataat misissuinerillu nutaat 

Økologiimut tunngatillugu Davisstrædimi paasissutissat amigaataapput. Avatangiisinut 

tunngatillugu aqutsinermi Davis Strædemilu uuliasiornikkut 

ingerlataalerumaartunut tunngatillugu aqutsineq killilersuinerlu pillugit ilisimasanik 

pisariaqartitsineq ilisimasanillu amigaateqarneq kapitali 12-imi 

takuneqarsinnaavoq. Uuliasiornermut atatillugu aqutsivigineqarnissaanni 

annertunerumik ilisimasaqarnissaq pisariaqartinneqarpoq makkua isumagineqassappata; 

a) naliliineq, pilersaarusiorneq ingerlatat sunniutaanerlussinnaasut 

sapinngisamik annikitsuutinnissaat siunertaralugu killilersuiffigisinnaajumallugit; 

b) sumiiffiit ajortumik eqqorneqarsinnaasut suusut paasilluarumallugit, 

aammalu uuliaarluernermut misikkarissutsimut takussutissatut 

nunap assiliaq pigineqartoq nutartersinnaajumallugu, c) annertoorsuarmik 

uuliaarluernerup siornagut kingornagullu atugassanik ilisimasanik 

tunngaviusussanik pilersitsiumalluni. 

43

44 

1 Introduction 

This document comprises a preliminary Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment 

(SEIA) of expected hydrocarbon activities in the eastern Davis 

Strait between 62° and 67° N (Fig. 1.1.1). It has been developed in cooperation 

with the Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP), DCE -Danish Centre 

for Environment and Energy (DCE) and the Greenland Institute of Natural 

Resources (GINR). 

The SEIA provides an overview of the environment in the licence area and 

adjacent areas and identifies major potential environmental impacts associated 

with expected offshore oil and gas activities. The SEIA will also identify 

knowledge and data gaps, highlight issues of concern, and make recommendations 

for mitigation and planning. An SEIA forms part of the basis for 

relevant authorities’ decisions on general restrictive or mitigative measures 

and monitoring requirements that must be dealt with by the companies applying 

for oil licences. The SEIA can be updated when new information becomes 

available. It is important to stress that an SEIA does not replace the 

need for site-specific Environmental Impact Assessments (EIAs). The latter is 

required by law whenever companies conduct site-specific activities that potentially 

can affect the environment. 

The present SEIA is based on existing published and unpublished sources. 

This includes previous environmental impact notes for the eastern Davis 

Strait (Anon 2004a, b, c), the environmental oil spill sensitivity mapping 

(Mosbech et al. 2000) and similar impact assessments of oil activities in the 

Disko West area and in the Baffin Bay region (Mosbech et al. 2007, 

Boertmann et al. 2009). Also the recent assessment from the Lofoten-Barents 

Sea area in Norway (Anon 2003b) has been drawn upon for comparison of 

potential impacts, because the environment there is comparable to West 

Greenland waters in a number of respects. Another important source of information 

is the Arctic Council working group’s AMAP Oil and Gas Assessment 

from 2007/8 (Skjoldal et al. 2007). In addition, the extensive literature 

from the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 has been a valuable source of information. 

Information from the large subsea Deepwater Horizon oil spill in 

the Mexican Gulf in 2010 (more than 800,000 tonnes, the largest peace-time 

marine oil spill ever) has also been drawn upon, although the scientific information 

available on effects is still limited at this point. 

Finally, an important issue in this context is climate change. This may affect 

both the physical and the biological environment; for example, the ice cover 

of Davis Strait area is expected to be reduced, which again will impact the 

ecology and particularly wildlife dependent on the ice, such as polar bears. 

Most of the data used for this SEIA has been sampled over a number of decades 

and as oil activities, particularly development and exploitation, may be 

initiated more than 10 years from now, environmental and ecological conditions 

may be very different from those at present.

Figure 1.1.1. The assessment 

area, existing licence blocks 

(issued 2002/2005) and the surrounding 

areas in Southwest 

Greenland, including main cities 

and important shallow-water shelf 

banks. 

66°N 

63°N 

60°W 

60°W 

Existing license blocks 

Assessment area 

0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

Lady Franklin 

1.1 Coverage of the SEIA 

Store 

Atammik 

Hellefiskebanke 

The offshore waters and coastal areas between 62° to 67° N in eastern Davis 

Strait (approximately from Paamiut to Sisimiut, Fig. 1.1.1) are in focus, as 

this is the region which potentially can be most affected by oil activities, particularly 

from accidental oil spills. This focus area will be referred to as the 

‘assessment area’. An SEIA has been produced for the area north of 67° N 

(Mosbech et al. 2007) and another one is being prepared for the area south of 

62° N (South Greenland). 

The present assessment area extends over waters of two municipalities: 

Sermersooq and Qeqqata. Four main cities are located within the area, Sisimiut, 

Maanitsoq, Nuuk and Paamiut, counting roughly 5,500, 2,800, 15,500 

and 1,900 people, respectively. In addition, seven settlements are found between 

62° to 67° N (from north to south: Sarfanngiut, Kangerlussuag, Kangaamiut, 

Napasoq, Atammik, Kapisillit and Qeqertarsuatsiaat), with altogether 

approx. 1,600 inhabitants (Greenland Statistics 2010, www.stat.gl). 

54°W 

54°W 

Sisimiut 

Lille 

Hellefiskebanke 

Maanitsoq 

Fyllas banke 

Søndre strømfjord 

Sukkertoppen 

Nuuk 

Danas Banke 

Paamiut 

48°W 

66°N 

63°N 

45

46 

1.2 Abbreviations and acronyms 

AMAP = Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme 

APNN = Department of Fisheries, Hunting and Agriculture 

EIA = Environmental Impact Assessment 

BAT = Best Available Technique 

bbl = barrel of oil 

BEP = Best Environmental Practice 

BMP = Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum, Greenland Homerule Government 

BTX = Benzene, Toluene and Xylene components in oil 

CI = confidence interval 

CRI = Cuttings Re-Injecting 

CV = Coefficient of Variance 

DCE = Danish Centre for Environment and Energy 

DMI = Danish Meteorological Institute 

DPC = Danish Polar Centre 

DDT = dichlorodiphenyltrichloroethane (a synthetic insecticide) 

EIA = Environmental Impact Assessment 

EPA = Environmental Protection Agency 

FPSO = Floating Production, Storage and Offloading unit 

GBS = Gravity Based Structure 

GEUS = Geological Survey of Denmark and Greenland 

GINR = Greenland Institute of Natural Resources 

gww = grammes, wet weight 

HBCD = hexabromocyclododecane (brominated flame retardants) 

HSE = Health, Safety and Environment 

ICES = International Council for the Exploration of the Sea 

IWC = International Whaling Commission 

LRTAP = Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution 

MARPOL = International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from 

Ships 

MIZ = Marginal Ice Zone 

NAO = North Atlantic Oscillation 

NERI = National Environmental Research Institute, Denmark 

NOW = North Water polynya 

OHC = organohalogen contaminants 

OSPAR = Oslo-Paris Convention for the protection of the marine environment 

of the Northeast Atlantic 

PAH = Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons 

PCB = Polychlorinated Biphenyls 

PBDE = polybrominated diphenyl ethers 

PLONOR = OSPARs list over substances which Pose Little Or No Risk to the 

Environment 

PNEC = Predicted No Effect Concentration 

POP = Persistent Organic Pollutants 

ppm = parts per million 

ppb = parts per billion 

PTS = permanent elevation in hearing threshold shift 

rms = root mean squared 

SEIA = Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment 

TBBPA = tetrabromobisphenol (brominated flame retardants) 

TBT = tributyltin (antifouling agent) 

TPH = Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons 

TTS = temporary elevation in hearing threshold 

USCG = United States Coast Guard

VEC = Valued Ecosystem Components 

VOC = Volatile Organic Compounds 

WGC = West Greenland Current 

WSF = Water Soluble Fraction 

ww = wet weight. 

47

48 

2 Summary of petroleum activities 

David Boertmann (AU) 

Utilisation of an oil/gas field develops through several phases, which to 

some degree overlap. These include exploration, field development and 

production, and finally decommissioning. The main activities during exploration 

are seismic surveys, exploration drilling and well testing. During field 

development, drilling continues (production wells, injection wells, delineation 

wells), and production facilities, pipelines and shipment facilities, etc. 

are constructed. Production requires maintenance of equipment and, during 

decommissioning, structures and facilities are dismantled and removed. 

These phases occur over long periods of time, usually several decades. For 

example, in the North Sea, oil exploration started in the 1960s and petroleum 

activities still continue today 

2.1 Seismic surveys 

The purpose of seismic surveys is to locate and delimit oil/gas fields, to 

identify drill sites and later during production to monitor developments in 

the reservoir. Marine seismic surveys are usually carried out by a ship that 

tows a sound source and a cable with hydrophones, which receive the echoed 

sound waves from the seabed. The sound source is an array of airguns 

(for example 28 airguns with a combined volume of 4330 inch 3 ) that generates 

a powerful pulse at 10-second intervals. Sound absorption generally is 

much lower in water than in air, causing the strong noise created by seismic 

surveys to travel very long distances, potentially disturbing marine animals. 

Regional seismic surveys (2D seismics) are characterised by widely spaced 

(over many kilometres) survey lines, while the more localised surveys (3D 

seismics) usually cover small areas with densely spaced lines. Rig site investigations 

and shallow geophysical investigations use comparatively much 

smaller sound sources than used during 2D sesmic surveys. For example, a 

company carrying out site surveys used a single airgum (150 inch 3 ). Vertical 

seismic profiles (VSPs) are essentially small-scale seismic surveys carried out 

during exploration drilling. They are highly localised and of short duration 

(a few days), and their effects will be covered by the discussion of seismic 

surveys in general. 

2.2 Exploration drilling 

Exploration drilling follows the seismic surveys. Offshore drilling takes 

place from drill ships or semi-submersible platforms, both of which have 

been used in Greenland waters. Most of the potential oil exploration areas in 

West Greenland waters are too deep for using a third type of drilling platform, 

the jack-up rigs, which are built to stand on the seabed. It is assumed 

that the drilling season in the waters of Davis Strait is limited to approximately 

May – November, depending on the year and exact location, due to 

the presence of ice and harsh weather conditions during winter and spring. 

Drilling requires the disposal of cuttings and drill mud. In the strategic EIA 

of the Lofoten-Barents Sea area it is assumed that approximately 450 m 3 cuttings 

are produced and approximately 2,000 m 3 mud is used per well 

(Akvaplan-niva & Acona 2003). The drilling of the three exploration wells in 

the Disko West area in 2010 generated between 665 and 900 m 3 cut-

tings/well and in total 6,000 tons of drilling mud. Energy consumption is 

very high during drilling, resulting in emissions of combustion gases such as 

CO2, SO2 and NOx. 

High levels of underwater noise are generated during drilling, mainly from 

the propellers, which secure the position of floating rigs. This noise has the 

potential to disturb marine mammals and acoustically sensitive fish (Schick 

& Urban 2000, Popper et al. 2004). 

2.3 Drilling mud and cuttings 

Drilling muds are used to optimise drilling operations. Muds were previously 

oil-based (OBM), but due to the toxicity, they have now been replaced 

mainly by water-based muds (WBM) or for drilling under certain difficult 

conditions by synthetic-based muds (SBM). The drilling results in a mixture 

of drilling mud fluids and solids, rock fragments (cuttings) and certain 

chemicals. Cuttings and mud have usually been deposited on the sea floor 

surrounding drill sites, resulting impacts on the benthic communities. 

2.4 Appraisal drilling 

If promising amounts of oil and gas are confirmed, field appraisal is used to 

establish the size of the field and the most appropriate production method, 

in order to assess whether the field is commercial. Appraisal may take several 

years to complete. Several appraisal wells are drilled to confirm the size 

and structure of the field, and well logging (analysis) provides data on the 

hydrocarbon bearing rocks. Well testing provides hydrocarbon samples and 

information on flow rate, temperatures and pressures. If appraisal confirms 

a commercial reservoir, the operator may then proceed to development. 

2.5 Other exploration activities 

One activity that may have environmental impact during the exploration 

phase is helicopter transport, which is associated with strong noise and can 

scare birds and marine mammals over a range of many kilometres. 

Well testing takes place when a well has been drilled and the presence of 

hydrocarbons and the potential for production is to be evaluated. The testing 

activities normally imply the use and release to the sea of different chemicals, 

occasionally including radioactive compounds. 

2.6 Development and production 

Field development also includes seismic surveys and extensive drilling activities 

(delineation wells, injection wells, etc), and drilling will take place 

until the field is fully developed. An oil development feasibility study in the 

sea west of Disko Island (north of the assessment area) assessed the most 

likely scenario to be a subsea well and gathering system tied back to a production 

facility either in shallower water established on a gravity-based 

structure (GBS) or onshore (APA 2003). From the production facility crude 

oil subsequently has to be transported by shuttle tankers to a trans-shipment 

terminal, most likely in eastern Canada. 

Environmental concerns during the development will mainly be related to 

seismic surveys, to drilling, to the construction of the facilities on the seabed 

49

50 

(wells and pipelines) and to discharges to sea and emissions to air. The major 

discharge to the sea is produced water. 

2.7 Produced water 

Produced water is by far the largest ‘by-product’ of the production process. 

On a daily basis some Canadian offshore fields produced between 11,000 

and 30,000 m 3 /day (Fraser et al. 2006), and the total amount produced on the 

Norwegian shelf was 174 millions m 3 in 2004 (OLF 2005). Produced water 

contains small amounts of oil, salts from the reservoir and chemicals added 

during the production process. Some of these chemicals are acutely toxic, or 

are radioactive, contain heavy metals, have hormone disruptive effects or act 

as nutrients which influence primary production (Lee et al. 2005). Some are 

persistent and have the potential to bio-accumulate. The produced water 

moreover contributes to the major part of the oil pollution during normal 

operations, e.g. in Norway up to 88 %. 

Produced water has usually been discharged to the sea after a cleaning process 

which reduces the amount of oil to levels accepted by the authorities (in 

the North Sea sector of Norway, for example, 40 mg/l or 30 mg/l as recommended 

by OSPAR). Discharges of produced water and chemicals to the water 

column appear to have acute effects on marine life only in the immediate 

vicinity of the installations due to the dilution effect. But long-term effects of 

the releases of produced water have not been studied, and several uncertainties 

have been expressed concerning, for example, the hormone-disrupting 

alkylphenols and radioactive components with respect to toxic concentrations, 

bioaccumulation, etc. (Meier et al. 2002, Rye et al. 2003, Armsworthy et 

al. 2005). 

Due to environmental concerns in the Arctic environment, discharges will be 

further reduced, e.g. by the discharge policy in the Lofoten-Barents Sea area 

(Anon 2003b), where produced water will be re-injected except during a 5 % 

‘off-normal’ operation time (Anon 2003b). 

2.8 Air emmissions 

Emissions to the air occur during all phases of petroleum development, including 

seismic survey and exploration drilling, although the major releases 

occur during development and production. Emissions to air are mainly 

combustion gases from the energy producing machinery (for drilling, production, 

pumping, transport, etc.). For example, the drilling of a well may 

produce 5 million m 3 exhaust per day (LGL 2005). But also flaring of gas and 

trans-shipment of produced oil contribute to emissions. The emissions consist 

mainly of greenhouse gasses (CO2, CH4), NOx, VOC and SO2. The production 

activities produce large amounts of CO2 in particular, and, for example, 

the emission of CO2 from a large Norwegian field (Statfjord) was 

more than 1.5 million tonnes in 1999 (STF 2000), and the drilling of the three 

exploration wells in 2010 in the Disko West area resulted in the emission of 

105,000 tonnes of CO2. 

Another very active greenhouse gas is methane (CH4), which is released in 

small amounts together with other VOCs from produced oil during transshipment.

2.9 Other activities 

Ship transport of produced oil will be an integrated part of the production 

phase. The APA (2003) assessment presents a scenario where ships containing 

1 million bbl will depart, within a 5-day cycle, from a highly productive 

field off Disko Island. Something similar could be expected for the eastern 

Davis Strait. 

Decommissioning is initiated when production wells are terminated, and 

will generate large amounts of waste material, which have to be disposed or 

regenerated. 

2.10 Accidents 

There are serious, acute and long-term environmental concerns in relation to 

accidents and off-normal operations. As expressed by the recent Oil and Gas 

Assessment by AMAP (Skjoldal et al. 2007), the largest issue of environmental 

concern for the marine Arctic environment is a large oil spill, which particularly 

in ice-covered waters represents a threat to animal populations and 

even to species. 

51

52 

3 Physical environment 

Michael Dünweber (AU) 

The assessment area forms part of the Davis Strait and is situated within 

what is normally referred to as the sub-Arctic region in the marine environment, 

defined as the marine areas where the upper water layers are of mixed 

polar and non-polar origin (Dunbar 1954). The Davis Strait is a semienclosed 

oceanic basin that separates western Greenland and Baffin Island, 

the largest island in the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. In the north it is connected 

to the Arctic Ocean through Baffin Bay and the Nares Strait. In the 

south it is connected to the Labrador Sea. In terms of hydrography, the area 

is characterised by sub-Arctic waters from the North Atlantic (average July 

temperature higher than 5° C) in the southern part and the high-Arctic waters 

of Baffin Bay (average July temperature below 5° C) in the northern part. 

The shelf comprises the rather shallow waters (depths less than 100m) in the 

northeastern corner to more than 2000m (down to 2,500 metres) in the 

southwestern corner. This shelf includes several large shoals or banks e.g., 

Fyllas Banke, Sukkertop Banke and Store Hellefiskebanke, typically ranging 

between 20 and 100m in depth. The shelf is traversed by deep troughs, 

which separate the fishing banks. At its narrowest point, a ridge up to approximately 

600m deep extends between Greenland (at Holsteinborg, Sisimiut) 

and Baffin Island (at Cape dyer). 

On a large scale, the metrological and oceanographic conditions of Davis 

Strait are quite well known. Recent descriptions are found in (Buch et al. 

2005, Myers et al. 2009), however the majority are focused on the Baffin Bay 

area with short descriptions of the Davis Strait (Tang et al. 2004, Dunlap & 

Tang 2006). More detailed descriptions on hydrography are found for offshore 

areas prepared by the Danish Meteorological Institute and Bureau of 

Minerals and Petroleum (DMI and BMP, respectively) (Nazareth & 

Steensboe 1998, Buch 2000, Karlsen et al. 2001, Buch 2002, Hansen et al. 2004, 

Ribergaard 2010). An early impact assessment report by NERI for the Fyllas 

Banke is found in Mosbech et al. (1996b) and an oil sensitivity atlas for the 

coastal zones of West Greenland by Mosbech et al. (2004a) and (2004b). 

3.1 Weather and Climate 

The weather in this region is determined by the North American continent 

and the North Atlantic Ocean, namely the North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO). 

NAO exerts a dominant influence on the winter-time temperatures of surface 

air and sea temperatures in the Arctic. When the NAO is positive, enhanced 

westerlies flow across the Atlantic and intensify the North Atlantic 

Current, which is deflected to the east of Greenland. This results in low intensities 

of the cold, south-flowing East Greenland Current and the warm, 

north-flowing Irminger current (derived from the North Atlantic Current), 

producing cold conditions in the Arctic region. When the NAO is negative, 

the conditions are almost the opposite, with low inflow of North Atlantic 

Waters coupled with an intensified East Greenland Current and Irminger 

Current giving warm Arctic temperatures (Buch 2002, Ribergaard 2010). 

However, the Greenland Inland ice and the steep coasts of Greenland also 

have a fundamental impact on the weather local to the area. Many Atlantic

Figure 3.2.1. Major sea surface 

currents in the northern Atlantic. 

depressions develop and pass near the southern tip of Greenland and frequently 

cause very strong winds off West Greenland. Also more local phenomena 

such as fog or polar lows are common features near the West Greenland 

shores. The probability of strong winds increases close to the Greenland 

coast and towards the Atlantic Ocean. Detailed descriptions of local wind 

patterns can be found in the sensitivity atlas of the West Greenland region 

prepared by NERI (Mosbech et al. 2004b). 

3.2 Oceanography 

3.2.1 Currents 

Along West Greenland the West Greenland Current flows with two principal 

components. Closest to the shore the surface layer (0-150 m) from the 

East Greenland Current (with cold Polar Sea water) moves northward. On 

its way, this water is diluted by run-off water from the various fjord systems, 

e.g. Godthåbsfjorden (Kangersuneq). The other component (depth layer 

of 150-800 m) is from the North Atlantic Current deriving from the 

Irminger Sea. This relatively warm and salty water can be traced all the way 

along West Greenland from Cape Farewell to Thule/Qaanaaq (Fig. 3.2.1). 

70°N 

60°N 

50°N 

Labrador Current 

West Greenland Current 

East Greenland Current 

East Greenland Current 

Irminger Current 

60°W 50°W 40°W 

30°W 

Greenland Sea 

Gyre 

Currents 

Cold water 

Norwegian Atlantic Current 

Mixed water 

Warm water 

20°W 

70°N 

60°N 


0 250 500 Km 

50°N 

53

54 

Along the Greenlandic west coast the current patterns tend to follow the bathymetry 

along the coast (Ribergaard et al. 2004). Southeast of the assessment 

area (south of the Fyllas Banke area) the current patterns are influenced 

by the steep continental slope, and the complex topography of several 

shallow banks that deflect the coastal currents and generate instabilities in 

the current flow. 

The East Greenland Current component loses its momentum on the way 

northward, and at the latitude of Fylla Banke (64º N) there is no longer a 

strong and solid current. A great proportion of the mass is deflected westward 

towards Canada where it joins the Labrador Current. Further north the 

deflection towards west continues resulting in a further weakening of the 

current (Buch 2000). 

The Polar water inflow is strongest during spring and early summer (May- 

July). The inflow of relatively warm Atlantic water masses of the West 

Greenland current is strongest during autumn and winter, explaining why 

the waters between 62º N and 67º N are usually ice free during winter time. 

Mixing and heat diffusion of the two layers (The Polar and Irminger Currents) 

are important factors in determining temperature conditions in the assessment 

area. Years where the East Greenland Current and Irminger Current 

are strong will often be cold years (Nazareth & Steensboe 1998, Buch 

2000, 2002, Hansen et al. 2004). 

A fifty-year long time series (1950-2000) of temperature and salinity measurements 

from West Greenland oceanographic observation points at Fyllas 

Banke has revealed strong inter-annual variability in the oceanographic 

conditions off West Greenland. These climatic variabilities can be related to 

shift in the NAO index from negative to positive values during the period 

1970-2000, resulting in colder climate (Buch et al. 2005). However, over the 

past two decades there has been a tendency towards increased water temperatures 

and reduced ice cover during the Arctic winters (Rothrock et al. 

1999, Parkinson 2000, Hansen et al. 2006, Comiso et al. 2008). High melt rates 

from the inner Godthåbsfjord glacier suggest increased input of freshwater 

to the West Greenland basin, presumably affecting the marine ecosystem 

and the fjord and marine water exchanges (Rysgaard et al. 2008 and 

references therein). The warmer climate in the Arctic during the last decade 

may partly be a result of the change in the NAO index from positive to negative. 

However, there is a profound increase of 0.4º C per decade (1966-2003) 

in Arctic surface air temperature, which deviates from that of natural expected 

variations (McBean et al. 2005). 

3.2.2 Hydrodynamic discontinuities 

Hydrodynamic discontinuities are areas where different water masses meet 

with sharp boundaries and steep gradients between them. They can be 

upwelling events where cold nutrient water is forced upwards to the upper 

layers, fronts between different water masses and ice edges (inclusive the 

marginal ice zone). Upwelling often occurs along the steep sides of the shelf 

banks driven by the tidal current and therefore usually alternates with 

downwelling. Model simulations north of the assessment area predict that 

that most frequent upwelling occurs west of the banks, both north and south 

of the Disko Bay entrance and at the slopes of Store Hellefiskebanke 

(Mosbech et al. 2007 and references therein).

3.2.3 The coasts 

The coastal zone between 62º-68º N is dominated by bedrock shorelines with 

many skerries and archipelagos. In sheltered areas small bays with sand or 

gravel are found between the rocks. Sandy beaches are found in the Marraq- 

Sermilik area and in the vicinity of the Frederikshåb Isblink glacier, where 

there are extensive sandy beaches and barrier islands (Mosbech et al. 1996b). 

3.3 Ice conditions 

Sea ice of the following main types occurs in the Davis Strait: ‘Storis’, which 

is mainly multi-year drift ice of polar origin carried to Southwest Greenland 

by the East Greenland Current; and the ‘West ice’, which is mainly first-year 

drift ice formed in Baffin Bay and the Davis Strait. Sea ice is normally present 

in the Davis Strait from November to mid-summer. However, the waters 

south of Nuuk are normally free of sea ice but occasionally covered for a 

short period of time in late winter. During the spring and early summer 

months, multi-year sea ice can drift into the area (Nazareth & Steensboe 

1998, Buch 2000, Karlsen et al. 2001, Buch 2002, Hansen et al. 2004). The Davis 

Strait experiences strong annual variability in sea ice extent and concentration, 

primarily driven by wind and current patterns, and low winter temperatures. 

The variability in distribution of the sea ice is primarily determined 

by the annual North Atlantic Oscillation (NAO) index, as explained 

above. The annual NAO variability determines the current pattern of the 

Davis Strait which influences the north-south extent of sea ice and the position 

of the sea ice edge (Buch 2000, 2002, Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2007b). 

The assessment area is influenced by the warm West Greenland Current, 

which is an offshoot of the Gulf Stream. The warm, north-flowing West 

Greenland Current creates open water in winter along the Southwest Greenland 

coast, and inhibits ice formation close to the Greenland West coast as 

far as to 67º N (Nazareth & Steensboe 1998, Buch 2000, 2002, Hansen et al. 

2004). This warm flowing current has such an impact in the area that it usually 

results in earlier breakup of the sea ice in the eastern part than in the 

western part of the Davis Strait. During winter and early spring West ice is 

conveyed south along Baffin Island to Davis Strait and Labrador Sea. At the 

end of the freeze-up season, first year sea ice usually dominates in the eastern 

part of the Davis Strait, while the western and central parts of the Davis 

Strait are dominated by thicker first year sea ice mixed with smaller parts 

(1-3 tenths) of multi-year sea ice. The northwestern part from Fyllas Banke is 

usually free of West ice from early May until early January and the southeastern 

part is free from mid-April until late January (Nazareth & Steensboe 

1998). 

Sea ice cover has decreased in the Arctic during the past 20 years (Parkinson 

2000), both in thickness and extent (Rothrock et al. 1999). This has occurred 

much faster than would be expected from natural climate variations 

(Vinnikov et al. 1999). Observations based on satellite data from 1979-2007 

show a reduction in sea ice cover of 11.4% per decade. This rate is expected 

to increase due to a reduction in the albedo effect as multi-year ice disappears 

(Comiso et al. 2008 and references therein). In recent years sea ice has 

shown high year-to-year variability or reduced extent for limited time periods 

in Disko Bay (Hansen et al. 2006), depending on atmospheric cooling 

(Buch 2000, 2002, Tang et al. 2004). Evidence exists of increased volumes of 

melt water in the fjord systems from the Greenland Ice Sheet as it loses mass 

(Velicogna & Wahr 2006, Velicogna 2009), including increased melt water 

55

56 

from the inner parts of the Godthåbsfjord (Rignot & Kanagaratnam 2006). 

The extent to which the increased freshwater input from the fjord systems 

affects the characteristics of the West Greenland Current is currently unknown. 

3.3.1 The West Ice and drift patterns 

The ice conditions between 60° and 71° N are primarily determined by the 

north- or northwest-flowing West Greenland Current bringing in relatively 

warm water and the effects of the cold south-flowing Baffin Island Current. 

Ice starts to form in the open water in the northern Baffin Bay in September 

when the amount of West Ice (first year ice) in the Davis Strait and Baffin 

Bay is at the lowest level. In the following months, ice cover increases steadily 

from north to south reaching a maximum in late winter, usually in March, 

after which it decreases (Nazareth & Steensboe 1998, Buch 2000, 2002, 

Hansen et al. 2004). The relatively warm West Greenland Current delays sea 

ice formation in the eastern Davis Strait and results in an earlier breakup of 

the sea ice than in the western parts. There is therefore always more ice cover 

in the western than in the eastern half of Baffin Bay (Fig. 3.3.1). The Baffin 

Island Current conveys large amounts of sea ice from Baffin Bay to the Davis 

Strait and Labrador Sea, especially during the winter and early spring 

months. During this period sea ice normally covers most of the Davis Strait 

north of 65° N, but not areas close to the Greenland coast. Here, a flaw lead 

(open water or thin ice) of varying widths often appears between the shore 

and the offshore parts of the fast- and drift ice as far north as latitude 67° N. 

South of 65°- 67° N, sea ice-free areas dominate throughout the year. The 

eastern part of the Davis Strait, south of Disko Island, is free of sea ice during 

this period (Fig. 3.3.1 and 3.3.2), whereas drifting ice dominates to the 

west and north. The area northwest of the Fyllas Banke area is normally free 

of West Ice from early May until early January (Valeur et al. 1996, Nazareth 

& Steensboe 1998). 

Small amounts of multi-year ice of Arctic Ocean origin drift to the western 

parts of the area from Lancaster Sound or Nares Strait; however, the multiyear 

ice from these waters does not usually reach the West Greenland 

shores. At the end of the freeze-up season, first-year ice in the thin and medium 

categories dominates in eastern parts (up to about 100 km from the 

Greenland coast). The western and central parts of the Davis Strait are dominated 

by medium and thick first-year ice categories, mixed locally with 

small amounts (1-3 tenths) of multi-year ice (Nazareth & Steensboe 1998) 

(Fig. 3.3.1). 

The local drift is to some extent controlled by the major surface current systems, 

the West Greenland Current and Baffin Island Current; however, the 

strength and direction of the surface winds also affect the local drift of sea 

ice, especially in the southern waters. 

Under normal conditions the multi-year sea ice (Storis) drifts to the Cape 

Farewell area in December/January depending on the low pressure system 

of the North Atlantic Ocean. In spring and summer, the low pressure system 

normally weakens and the Storis drift into Northeastern Labrador Sea or 

North-westward along the West Greenland coast. However, on average 

Storis drifts north of 63º N every second year, but the amount and presence 

of the Storis varies between these years. Storis has never been observed 

north of 63º N earlier than late February (Hansen et al. 2004).

Jan Feb May Apr 

May 

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec 

Figure 3.3.1. The monthly sea ice cover in 2010, January - December. Red and magenta indicate the very dense ice (8-10/10), 

while yellow indicates somewhat looser ice. The loosest ice (1-3/10) is not recorded. Images based on Multichannel Microwave 

Radiometer (AMSR and SMMR) and processed by the Technical University of Denmark (DTU) with support from the European 

Space Agency (ESA)'s PolarView project. 

The size of the common ice floes near the marginal ice zone in the Davis 

Strait are less than 100 metres as a result of melting and breakup by waves. 

These floes are often consolidated, forming extensive areas without any 

open water. The dominant size of ice floes range from large floes of about 1 

km wide to vast floes larger than 10 km (Nazareth & Steensboe 1998). 

A sea ice drift pattern was studied north of the assessment area in April 2006 

by Mosbech et al. (2007 and references therein). In April 2006 two satellite 

transmitters were deployed on the sea ice, west of Nuussuaq Peninsula. 

Their purpose was to track the movements of the drift ice. One was tracked 

until June, when it had moved approximately 500 km in total (entire length 

of track line), but overall it had only moved 66 km towards the southwest. 

The second transmitter was only tracked for a couple of days, when it 

moved 21 km towards the south (Mosbech et al. 2007). No specific sea ice 

drift patterns were observed during that study which suggest further experiments 

are required on this subject in the future. 

3.3.2 Icebergs 

Icebergs differ from sea ice in many ways: 

• They originate from land 

• They produce freshwater on melting 

• They are deep-drafted, with appreciable heights above sea level 

• They are always considered as an serious local hazard to navigation and 

offshore activity 

Jun 

57

Figure 3.3.2. Probability of sea ice in West Greenland waters based on data from the period 1960-96. (A) March 1 st (B) June 4 th 

(C) September 3 rd and (D) December 3 rd . Based on data from the Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI) and Canadian Ice Service 

– Environment Canada (CIS). 

58

Figure 3.3.3. Average sea ice 

extent as percentage ice cover in 

West Greenland waters based on 

data in the period 1979-2007 

(medio March). Blue colours 

indicate highest percentage ice 

cover while red indicates lowest 

percentage cover. White has no 

data value. ’High’ ice cover is 

encountered west of Disko Island 

while low ice cover is found south 

of Sisimiut in March (Data 

sources: Ocean and Sea ice 

(EUMETSAT). 

75°N 

70°N 

70°W 

80°W 

Average sea ice extent 

(medio march 1979-2007) 

65°N 

Percent ice cover 

0 - 3 

4 - 13 

14 - 29 

30 - 45 

46 - 61 

62 - 77 

78 - 88 

89 - 94 

95 - 100 


0 150 300 Km 

60°N 

70°W 

The process of calving from the front of a glacier produces an infinite variety 

of icebergs, bergy bits and growlers. Icebergs are described by their size according 

to the following classification: 

Type Height (m, above sea level) Length (m) 

growler less than 1 up to 5 

bergy bit 1 to 5 5 to 15 

small iceberg 5 to 15 15 to 60 

medium iceberg 16 to 45 61 to 120 

large iceberg 46 to 75 121 to 200 

very large iceberg Over 75 Over 200 

The production of icebergs on a volumetric basis varies only slightly from 

year to year. Once calving has been accomplished, meteorological and 

oceanographic factors begin to affect the icebergs. Icebergs are carried by sea 

currents directed by the integrated average of the water motion over the 

60°W 

60°W 

50°W 

50°W 

40°W 

75°N 

70°N 

65°N 

59

60 

whole draft of the iceberg. However, wind also plays an important role, either 

directly or indirectly. 

Iceberg sources 

Glaciers are numerous in West Greenland; however, the productive glaciers 

which produce the most and the largest icebergs are Jakobshavn Isbræ (Ilulissat), 

Disko Bay western Greenland and Ittoqqortoormiit, eastern Greenland. 

In general, icebergs occur in West Greenland waters between 60° and 

72° N, with some exceptions, e.g. low iceberg concentrations off Sisimiut. In 

Disko Bay, hundreds of icebergs are present throughout the year (Fig. 3.3.4) 

(Valeur et al. 1996, Karlsen et al. 2001). 

Most of the icebergs found near assessment area are formed from East 

Greenland glacial outlets. Large annual variation in the number and size of 

the icebergs rounding Cape Farewell and transported all the way up to 

Nuuk and Maniitsoq with the West Greenland current (Nazareth & 

Steensboe 1998, Buch 2000, Karlsen et al. 2001). Occasionally, many small 

icebergs and bergy bits are calved in the southwest Greenland fjords, however 

these have a short life span due to melting and rarely affect ocean areas 

(Karlsen et al. 2001). 

Iceberg drift and distribution 

On a large scale the basic water currents and drift of icebergs in the Davis 

Strait are fairly simple. There is a north-flowing current along the Greenland 

coast (West Greenland current) and a south-flowing current along Baffin Island 

and the Labrador coast (Baffin Island current), giving an anti-clockwise 

drift pattern (Fig. 3.3.4). However, branching of the general currents causes 

variations, and these can have a significant impact on the iceberg number 

and their residence time. Thus, the distribution of icebergs in the area 63º to 

68º N is influenced both by the north going West Greenland current and the 

south going Baffin Island current and the interaction between them. Thus, 

the iceberg drift mainly responds to the surface circulation of these two current 

patterns (Karlsen et al. 2001). 

Most of the icebergs found near the Fyllas Banke area are from the East 

Greenland glaciers. Occasionally, East Greenland icebergs under the effects 

of wind and the absence of the Irminger Current (part of the West Greenland 

Current) drift westwards across the southern Davis Strait to the coast of 

Labrador and Baffin Island. There, they join the main stream drifting southwards. 

Distribution and density of icebergs are also controlled by the presence of 

multi-year sea ice (Storis), since icebergs drifting within the Storis are prone 

to lower melting rates and less deterioration from wave/swell action 

(Karlsen et al. 2001, Hansen et al. 2004). The bathymetry is another factor determining 

the variability of icebergs south of the Fyllas Banke area, since the 

continental slope being particularly steep makes it a shallow water region. 

This underlying bathymetry formats eddies (i. e. a circular and counter current 

motion from the main water flow) creating instability in the Irminger 

Current, resulting in westward branching of the current. Therefore, the largest 

north-going icebergs will probably ground before reaching into certain 

shallow areas or branch off to the western side of the Fyllas Banke area 

(Nazareth & Steensboe 1998, Hansen et al. 2004).

Figure 3.3.4. Major iceberg 

sources and general drift pattern 

in the West Greenland Waters. 

Data source: US National Ice 

Center (NIC). 

A study in the late 1970s on iceberg masses that occur on the western coast 

of Greenland observed low iceberg mass (0.3-0.7 million tonnes, max.: 2.8 

mil. tonnes) in the area between 64º and 66º N compared with iceberg masses 

north and south of the area (Nazareth & Steensboe 1998 and references 

therein). The year-to-year variability in distribution of multi-year sea ice and 

the presence of the Irminger current in the Davis Strait therefore concurrently 

determine the amount and size of icebergs reaching the assessment area. 

Studies of the iceberg distribution at the Fyllas Banke area in summer 2000 

by Karlsen et al. (2001) were predominantly of bergy bits and growlers 

types, mostly entering the area from southerly to northeasterly directions. 

More than 200 icebergs were observed during the summer period and presumably 

represent a normal seasonal iceberg conditions. Other studies of the 

iceberg distribution on the west coast of Greenland are from the late 70’ties, 

and summarized in later reports (Valeur et al. 1996, Karlsen et al. 2001). 

The majority of icebergs from Jakobshavn Isbræ, Disko Bay are carried 

northward to northeastern Baffin Bay and Melville Bay before heading 

61

62 

southward. Most of the icebergs from Baffin Bay drift southward in the 

western Davis Strait, joining the Labrador Current further south; although 

some may enter the eastern Davis Strait instead. Icebergs produced in Disko 

Bay or Baffin Bay will generally never reach the Greenland shores south of 

68° N. 

Iceberg dimensions 

The characteristics of iceberg masses and dimensions off the west coast of 

Greenland are poorly investigated, and the following is mainly based on a 

Danish study from the late 1970s (Nazareth & Steensboe 1998 and references 

therein). 

In the eastern Davis Strait the largest icebergs were most frequently found 

south of 64° N and north of 66° N. South of 64° N, the average mass of an 

iceberg near the 200 m depth contour varied between 1.4 and 4.1 million 

tonnes, with a maximum mass of 8.0 million tonnes. Average draft was 60-80 

m and maximum draft was 138 m. In between 64° N and 66° N, average 

masses were between 0.3 and 0.7 million tonnes with maximum mass of 2.8 

million tonnes. Average draft was 50-70 m and maximum draft was estimated 

to be 125 m. The largest icebergs north of 66° N were found north and 

west of Store Hellefiskebanke. The average iceberg mass was about 2 million 

tonnes with a maximum mass of 15 million tonnes. It is worth noting that 

many icebergs are deeply drafted and, due to the bathymetry, large icebergs 

will not drift into shallow water regions (Valeur et al. 1996, Karlsen et al. 

2001). 

Maximum draft can be evaluated by studying factors which limit the dimension: 

glacier thickness, topographic factors which cause icebergs to be calved 

into ‘small’ pieces, and thresholds in the mouths of the glacier fjords. The 

measurements of iceberg drafts north of 62°N indicate that an upper limit 

for a draft of 230 m will only very rarely be exceeded; however, no systematic 

‘maximum draft measurements’ exist and the extremes remain unknown. 

Several crushes or breaks of submarine cables have occurred at water depths 

of about 150-200 m; the maximum depth recorded was 208 m, southwest of 

Cape Farewell. The large icebergs originating in Baffin Bay are expected to 

have a maximum draft of about 250-300 m (Valeur et al. 1996, Karlsen et al. 

2001).

4 Biological environment 

4.1 Primary productivity 


4.1.1 General context 

The waters off West Greenland are characterised by low species diversity 

whereas primary production is relatively high. Due to the presence of winter 

ice in many areas and the marked variation in solar radiation, however, 

primary production is often highly seasonal with an intensive phytoplankton 

bloom in spring. 

The Arctic oceans generally have a brief and intense phytoplankton bloom 

immediately after break-up of the sea ice. This is characterised by high (transient) 

biomass and a grazing food web dominated by large copepods, i.e. 

Calanus, but relatively low total primary production averaged over depth 

and season. However, this general picture is modified by the presence of 

large polynyas, where sea ice breaking up early and nutrients being made 

available from upwelling lead locally to very high production. 

Development of the phytoplankton (microscopic algae) bloom in spring 

gives a peak in the primary production in the water column and is the single 

most important event determining the productive capacity of Arctic marine 

food webs. The time of the onset of the spring phytoplankton bloom (i.e. 

spring bloom) varies each year according to the duration of the winter sea 

ice cover, oceanography and meteorological conditions. The spring bloom 

develops when the water column is stabilised and retreat of the sea-ice cover 

and solar input penetrates into the water column. The spring bloom quickly 

depletes the surface layers (the euphotic zone) of nutrients, inhibiting primary 

production for some time. 

4.1.2 Productivity at the sea-ice edge and marginal ice zone 

At ice edges the spring bloom is often earlier than in ice-free waters due to 

the stabilising effect of the ice on the water column. Here, the bloom can be 

very intense and attracts species of seabirds and marine mammals which often 

occur and congregate along ice edges and in the marginal ice zones 

(Frederiksen et al. 2008). Ice edges are not stable over time, and their distribution 

varies according to oceanographic and climatic conditions. However, 

at sites where nutrients are continuously brought to the uppermost water 

layers, e.g. by hydrodynamic discontinuities such as upwelling or fronts, 

primary production and hot spots may occur throughout the summer. The 

underside of the sea ice has its own special biological community with algae, 

invertebrates and fish. In spring when the light increases, this community 

can be very productive. There is limited knowledge on sea-ice communities 

in the assessment area, but see section 4.5 for the information available. 

63

64 

4.1.3 The spring phytoplankton bloom in Davis Strait 

The spring phytoplankton bloom (i.e. spring bloom) usually begins in 

Southwest Greenland in late March/early April. In the ice-covered areas 

timing of its onset is determined by withdrawal of the Davis Strait pack ice 

(the West Ice). However, most of the southeastern part of the assessment area 

generally has open water all year around due to the warm West Greenland 

Current. In the southwestern part of the assessment area the sea ice retreats 

in March and the northern part usually has open water April-May. Sea 

ice is therefore generally not considered a limiting factor for initiation of the 

spring bloom in the assessment area. 

A multidisciplinary ecological survey programme (2005-2009) is presented 

in the annual ‘Nuuk Basic’ reports, presenting sampling from the inner 

Godthåbsfjord to Fyllas Banke, southwest Greenland (Juul-Pedersen et al. 

2008, Rysgaard et al. 2008, Juul-Pedersen et al. 2009) and described in detail 

for the year 2006 (Arendt et al. 2010). The following biological descriptions 

focus mainly on the Fyllas Banke area, which is an area of key importance in 

the assessment area. Based on measurements of phytoplankton concentration 

for 2010, elevated values occur in March and early April with peak sea 

surface concentrations in late April and early May (see also Fig. 4.1.1). Phytoplankton 

biomass then decreases throughout the summer, usually associated 

with the pycnocline. In late summer in August there is usually a minor 

secondary bloom peak. 

High concentrations of chlorophyll a (chl a) were frequently measured at the 

outer Fyllas Banke. A high integrated phytoplankton biomass (chl a converted 

to carbon) in the central parts of Fyllas Banke was measured to 4857mg C 

m -2 in the upper 50 m (Arendt et al. 2010). High chl a biomass was also 

found in another shallow water area at Store Hellefiskebanke, northeast of 

the assessment area. The shallow banks keep the phytoplankton in the photic 

zone where net growth is possible. Strong tidal mixing may also feed the 

upper layers with nutrients (i.e. upwelling), which boosts the bloom even 

more. Upwelling areas are, for example, found at the fishery banks in South 

and West Greenland e.g. Fyllas Banke and Store Hellefiskebanke. Upwelling 

areas may, besides enhanced production, also retain copepods, which again 

are utilised by fish larvae (Simonsen et al. 2006). Therefore, the bank areas 

are important for increased primary productivity and carbon cycling caused 

by nutrient-rich upwelling events from wind and tidal motions in the Davis 

Strait. 

4.1.4 Productivity at polynyas and shear zones 

Polynyas are predictable open-water areas in otherwise ice-covered waters 

in winter and spring. Part of the assessment area has open water all year 

around, and thereby acts much like a polynya; although always open to the 

south. In polynyas primary production starts much earlier than in icecovered 

areas, which means they often are preferred feeding areas for marine 

mammals and seabirds. However, the mere presence of open water 

makes polynyas attractive for resting seabirds and for mammals that are dependent 

on open waters for breathing. Many migrating seabirds also use polynyas 

as staging grounds on their way to breeding grounds further north.

Figure 4.1.1. Monthly progressions in sea surface chlorophyll a (chl a) concentrations (mg m -3 ) from March to August 2010. 

Data are presented as a monthly average from MODIS level 3 aqua. The colours indicate chl a concentrations, blue areas are 

very low and red is high chl a concentration and white indicate ice cover or no data values. The spring bloom in 2010 seems to 

start in March at Fyllas Banke. Productivity peaks in April and May and occurs then more widely over the shelf break and in 

neighbouring offshore areas. Following a period of low surface chl a in the assessment area in July a post bloom occurs at the 

coast in August (e.g. at the mouth of Godthåbsfjorden). Data is from the Oceancolor homepage, NASA. 

Shear zones are where the solid coastal ice meets the dynamic drift ice. 

Cracks and leads with open waters are frequent in this type of area and may 

attract marine mammals and seabirds. When the West ice reaches the coasts, 

although this occurs rarely in the assessment area, a shear zone is usually 

present. 

4.2 Zooplankton 



Zooplankton has an important role within marine food webs since it provides 

the principal pathway to transfer energy from primary producers 

65

66 

(phytoplankton) to consumers at higher trophic levels e. g. fish and their 

larvae; whales, primarily the bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus) (Laidre et 

al. 2007, Laidre et al. 2010): and seabirds, e. g. little auk (Alle alle), a specialised 

zooplankton feeder on the large copepods of the genus Calanus 

(Karnovsky et al. 2003). Most of the higher trophic levels in the Arctic marine 

ecosystem rely on the lipids that are accumulated in Calanus (Lee et al. 

2006, Falk-Petersen et al. 2009). Consequently, a great deal of the biological 

activity, e.g. spawning and growth of fish, is synchronised with the life cycle 

of Calanus. Zooplankton not only supports the large, highly visible components 

of the marine food web but also the microbial community. Regeneration 

of nitrogen and carbon through excretion by zooplankton is crucial for 

bacterial and phytoplankton production (Daly et al. 1999, Møller et al. 2003). 

Zooplankton, mainly the Calanus copepods, play a key ecological role in 

supplying the benthic communities with high quality food with their large 

and fast-sinking faecal pellets (Juul-Pedersen et al. 2006). Thus, vertical flux 

of faecal pellets sinking down to the seabed sustains diverse benthic communities 

such as bivalves, sponges, echinoderms, anemones, crabs and fish 

(Turner 2002, and references therein). 

4.2.2 The importance of Calanus copepods 

Earlier studies on the distribution and functional role of zooplankton in the 

pelagic food-web off Greenland, mainly in relation to fisheries research, 

have revealed the prominent role of Calanus. The species of this genus feed 

on algae and protozoa in the surface layers and accumulate surplus energy 

in form of lipids, which are used for overwintering at depth and to fuel reproduction 

the following spring (Lee et al. 2006, Falk-Petersen et al. 2009, 

Swalethorp et al. 2011). Most of the higher trophic levels rely on the lipids 

accumulated in Calanus mainly as wax esters. These can be transferred 

through the food web and incorporated directly into the lipids of the consumer 

through several trophic levels. For instance, lipids originating from 

Calanus can be found in the blubber of beluga and sperm whales, which feed 

on fish, shrimps and squid (Smith & Schnack-Schiel 1990, Dahl et al. 2000) 

and in the bowhead whale (B. mysticetus) and northern right whales (Eubalaena 

glacialis), which feed mainly on Calanus (Hoekstra et al. 2002, Zachary 

et al. 2009). Consequently, many biological activities – e.g. spawning and 

growth of fish – are synchronised with the life cycle of Calanus. In larvae of 

the Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) and sandeel (Ammodytes 

sp.) from the West Greenland shelf, various copepod species, including 

Calanus were the main prey item during the main productive season (May, 

June and July). They constituted between 88% and 99% of the biomass of ingested 

prey (Simonsen et al. 2006). 

Vertical distributions of the Calanus species are influenced strongly by ontogenetic 

vertical migrations that occur between the dark winter season and 

the light summer season. For the most of the light summer season Calanus is 

present in the surface waters. During summer and autumn, Calanus begins 

to descend to deep-water layers for winter hibernation, changing the plankton 

community structure in the upper water column from Calanus to smaller 

copepod and protozooplankton dominance. The grazing impact on phytoplankton 

by the smaller non-Calanus copepod community after Calanus has 

left the upper layer can be considerably higher than in spring. This is a result 

of shorter generation time and more sustained reproduction as well as relaxed 

food competition and predation by Calanus (Hansen et al. 1999, and 

references therein). The importance of small non-Calanus population in eco-

Figure 4.2.1. Calanus spp. biomass 

(mg C m -3 ). The coloured 

dots represent biomass values 

from different studies; red dots: 

from May 2006 in the 0-65 m 

column (Arendt et al. 2010), blue 

dots: from July 2000 (Pedersen & 

Smidt 2000) at 0-100 m, dark 

grey dots: from June-July 1996 

(Munk et al. 2003) at 0-60 m 

column. The biomass values of 

Calanus spp. summer and an 

autumn period show higher biomass 

values east and west of the 

fishery banks. Seasonal descent 

of Calanus towards winter hibernation 

is presumed to have begun 

in July-August. Note: Biomass 

values are calculated 

based on different length-carbon 

regressions and using different 

sampling gear e.g. net types vary 

between studies. 

system productivity can be greater than implied by their biomass alone 

(Hopcroft et al. 2005, Madsen et al. 2008). 

4.2.3 Zooplankton in the Davis Strait 

Knowledge of zooplankton in the assessment area is based on studies covering 

a 34-year time series from the 1950s by Pedersen & Smith (2000) and recent 

studies covering most of the southwestern coastal zone (Pedersen & 

Rice 2002, Head et al. 2003, Munk et al. 2003, Pedersen et al. 2005, Arendt et 

al. 2010). The coastal studies in Southwest Greenland clearly corroborate the 

hypothesis that most of the biological activity in the surface layer is present 

in the spring and early summer in association with the spring bloom and 

appearance of the populations of the large copepods Calanus. Calanus occurrence 

is widespread in the West Greenland waters, where high biomass values 

have been recorded across the fishery banks in Southwest Greenland, 

and is almost exclusively dominated by C. finmarchicus (Pedersen et al. 2005, 

Arendt et al. 2010) (Fig. 4.2.1). 

66°N 

64°N 

60°W 

60°W 

Calanus spp. biomass 

Survey period 

! May 2006, 0-65 m column 

62°N 

! July 2000, 0-100 m column 

! June-July 1996, 0-60 m column 

Biomass (mg C m -3 ) 

! 0.001 - 5 

! 5 - 10 

! 10 - 20 

! 20 - 50 

! 50 - 100 

! 100 - 150 

0 

60°N 


75 150 Km 

! 

! 

! 

! 

55°W 

! ! ! 

! 

! 

! 

55°W 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! ! ! ! ! ! 

! 

! 

! 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

67

68 

In general, abundance of C. finmarchicus increases as you move from the Arctic 

region and further south to the sub-Arctic. This is because the drift of C. 

finmarchicus into the assessment area by means of the West Greenland current 

has strong implications for their distribution, life cycle and production, 

and for the succeeding link in higher trophic transfer, e.g. Atlantic cod (Gadus 

morhua). Transportation of C. finmarchicus from the North Atlantic into 

the South and West Greenland waters can, depending on food availability, 

outnumber the true Arctic C. glacialis and C. hyperboreus by a factor of three 

throughout the year (Pedersen et al. 2005, and references therein). C. glacialis 

and C. hyperboreus have a higher fat content. 

There is a lack of knowledge of zooplankton from the offshore parts. It is assumed 

that the zooplankton community in the assessment area is similar to 

that found in the coastal area in Southwest Greenland; however, there is expected 

to be a difference in biomass with lower density offshore than inshore/coastal 

areas, e.g. the Fyllas Banke area. 

4.2.4 Zooplankton dynamics in the coastal areas 

High occurrence of zooplankton species linked to the fishery banks, e.g. 

Fyllas Banke, are controlled by the hydrographic characteristics of the area 

and associated predator-prey interactions (Pedersen & Smidt 2000, Pedersen 

& Rice 2002, Pedersen et al. 2002, Ribergaard et al. 2004, Buch et al. 2005, 

Pedersen et al. 2005, Bergstrøm & Vilhjalmarsson 2007, Arendt et al. 2010, 

Laidre et al. 2010). The frontal system occurring at the banks and the 

upwelling of deeper nutrient rich waters enhances the productivity of the 

plankton communities in those areas. 

A model simulation by Pedersen et al. (2005) describing the linkages of hydrographical 

processes and plankton distribution demonstrated across the 

fishery banks (64-67º N) of the Southwest coast of Greenland that wind 

fields and tidal currents were important, creating temporally retention areas 

of the plankton. High copepod abundances, mainly Calanus spp. coincide 

with high chl a values just east and west of the banks. This agrees with model 

description of upwelling, which occurs mainly west and to a lesser extent 

east of the banks, increasing the plankton productivity in the bank areas. 

Munk et al. (2003) found a close link of plankton distribution with hydrographical 

fronts, and apparently specific plankton communities were established 

in different areas of the important fishery banks of West Greenland. 

Ichthyo- (fish) and zooplankton communities differed in species composition 

in the north-south distribution of polar versus temperate origin. It 

seems that flow of major currents and establishment of hydrographical 

fronts are of primary importance to the structure of plankton communities 

in the West Greenland shelf area, influencing plankton assemblage and the 

early life of fish. 

4.2.5 Higher trophic levels – large zooplankton and fish larvae 

Large zooplankton species such as the krill species (Meganyctiphanes norvegica) 

were examined in September 2005 by the Greenland Institute of Natural 

Resources (GINR) (Bergstrøm & Vilhjalmarsson 2007) as well as in association 

with large baleen whales in West Greenland (Laidre et al. 2010). Krill 

were found in scattered aggregations in most of the area (Fig. 4.2.2).

69 

Fish larvae are important components of plankton, and movements and be- 

haviour have been studied for some of the commercially utilised species. 

Pedersen & Smidt (2000) analysed fish larvae data sampled along three tran- 

sects during summer in West Greenland waters over 34 years. Peak abun- 

dance fish larvae were also observed in early summer in association with the 

peak abundance of their plankton prey. 

Recently, several surveys have investigated the horizontal distribution of 

fish larvae (Born et al. 2001, Munk et al. 2003, Simonsen et al. 2006) in rela- 

tion to oceanography and their potential prey along West Greenland (Fig. 

4.2.3, 4.2.4, 4.2.5). They document that the important sites for the develop- 

ment of fish larvae are the banks and the shelf break, where the highest bio- 

mass of their copepod prey is also located (Simonsen et al. 2006). 

Figure 4.2.2. Krill abundance (N 

m -2 ) from acoustic measurements 

from September 2005 in the 0-50 

m column (Bergstrøm & 

Vilhjalmarsson 2007). High krill 

abundance, mostly Meganyc- 

tiphanes norvegica, is evident 

near the coastal areas. 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

!! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!!! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

#### 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

### ##### 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

### 

## 

#### 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

### 

## 

# 

## 

## 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# # 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

#### 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# # 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

!! 

! 

!! 

! 

! 

! 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

### 

# 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

### 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

### ##### 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

### 

## 

#### 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

## 

## 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

###### 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

## 

# 

# 

# 

50°W 

50°W 

55°W 

55°W 

60°W 

60°W 

68°N 

66°N 

66°N 

64°N 

64°N 

62°N 

62°N 

60°N 0 75 150 Km 

Krill spp. 

Abundance (N m -2 

) 

# No observations 

1 - 5 

6 - 10 

11 - 20 

21 - 50 

51 - 100 

101 - 135 

Assessment area

Figure 4.2.3. Greenland halibut 

(Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) 

larvae abundance (N m -2 ). The 

coloured dots represent abundance 

values from different studies; 

red, blue, dark-grey and 

yellow dots: from surveys in May- 

July 1996-2000 (Munk et al. 

2000, Munk et al. 2003, Munk 

pers. comm. and REKPRO-data 

from C. Simonsen and S.A. 

Pedersen pers. comm.). There 

are indications of relatively high 

abundances offshore compared 

with inshore/coastal areas. 

70 

66°N 

64°N 

60°W 

60°W 

Larvae, Greenland halibut 

(Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) 

Survey period 

62°N 

60°N 

July 2000 

( May 2000 

h( June 1999 

h( June-July 1996 


) 


h( 0.004 - 0.05 

h( 0.05 - 0.10 

h( 0.10 - 0.15 

h( 0.15 - 0.20 

h( 0.20 - 0.29 


0 75 150 Km 

# 

h( ( 

# # # # # # h( ( # # # # # # 

h( ( 

( h( ( h( 

# 

( h( h( ( 

( h( h( ( h( ( ( h( 

( h( 

# # 

h( ( 

# # h( ( h( ( # # # h( ( # 

# 

h( 

h( ( h( 

h( ( ( ( h( h( ( ( h( # h( ( # h( ( # # 

# ( h( h( h( ( h(h( ( 

h( ( 

h( # # 

h( ( h( ( 

# 

Greenland halibut larvae concentrations in the upper water column are relatively 

high south of 68° N, while within the major part of the assessment area 

they are low in June-July, based on Figure 4.2.3. Other fish larvae that 

have been studied include sandeel (Ammodytes spp.), which were very numerous 

particularly on some of the banks (Fig. 4.2.4) (Pedersen & Smidt 

2000). 

In 1996-2000 studies on fish larvae in West Greenland waters were carried 

out (Munk et al. 2000, Munk et al. 2003, Munk pers. comm., and REKPROdata 

from C. Simonsen and S.A. Pedersen pers. comm.). These studies did 

not find the sandeel larvae concentrations as reported by Pedersen & Smidt 

(2000). They found large interannual variation in abundance of polar cod 

larvae and confirmed the distribution of Greenland halibut larvae as reported 

by Pedersen & Smidt (2000) (Fig. 4.2.3, 4.2.5). Recurrent concentrations 

areas of fish larvae were not located, and generally there seems to be large 

variation in distribution and abundance of fish larvae between years. Although 

planktonic organisms are supposed to move with the currents there 

seem to be retention areas over the banks, where plankton is concentrated 

and entrapped for periods (Pedersen et al. 2005). 

( h( 

# 

h( 

h( ( ( h( (( h( ( h( ( h( h( ( h( ( 

h( ( ( h( 

( h( ( h( h( ( 

( 

55°W 

( 

55°W 

# # # # # 

h( ( h( 

( h( 

h( ( h( ( # 

( h( (( h( 

( h( ( h( # h( ( h( ( h( ( ( h( ( h( # 

( h( 

# 

( h( 

h( ( 

h( ( 

# 

# 

# # # 

( h( # # # h( ( ## # # 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

Figure 4.2.4. Red dots indicate 

sandeel (Ammodytes sp.) larvae 

abundance (N m -2 ) June-July 

from 1950 to 1984 (Pedersen & 

Smidt 2000). A relatively high 

abundance of sandeel was found 

at Fyllas Banke. 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

Larvae, Sandeel 

(Ammodytes spp.) 


) 

( 0.005 - 5 

( 5 - 10 

( 10 - 15 

( 15 - 20 

( 20 - 36 



60°W 

60°W 

60°N 0 75 150 Km 

( 

( 

# 

( 

( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( ( 

( ( 

( 

( # 

( 

# ( 

( 

(( ( 

( ( 

( 

( # ( 

# ( # ( ( ( # ( ( 

( 

( 

( ( 

( 

( 

( ( # ( ( ( 

( ( ( ( 

( ( # ( ( ( ( ( 

( 

( ( ( 

# 

# 

( 

( 

( 

( 

( # 

( 

( 

( 

( ( 

( 

( ( 

( 

( 

( ( 

( ( ( 

# ( 

( ( ( 

( 

( ( ( ( 

( ( 

( 

55°W 

55°W 

( 

( # 

( 

( ( ( 

( 

( ( ( 

( # 

# # 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# ( 

( 

( 

# 

# # ( 

# ( ( ( 

( # # ( 

# 

( 

# 

( 

# 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

71

Figure 4.2.5. Juvenile polar cod 

(Boreogadus saida) abundance 

(N m -2 ). The coloured dots represent 

abundance values from 

different studies; red, blue and 

dark grey dots: from surveys in 

May-July 1996-2000 (Munk et al. 

2000, Munk et al. 2003, Munk 

pers. comm. and REKPRO-data 

from C. Simonsen and S.A. 

Pedersen pers. comm.). The 

juvenile polar cod from different 

studies in summer and an autumn 

period all indicate relatively 

high abundance in the coastal 

areas and east and west of the 

fishery banks. 

72 

66°N 

64°N 

60°W 

60°W 

Larvae, Polar cod 

(Boreogadus saida) 

Survey period 

! May 2000 

! July 2000 

62°N 

June 1999 

Abundance (N m -2 ) 


! 0.001- 0.005 

! 0.005 - 0.05 

! 0.05 - 0.5 

! 0.5 - 1 

! 1 - 1.5 

! 1.5 - 2.2 


0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

4.2.6 Knowledge gaps 

# 

# # # # # # # 

# # # # # 

# # 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# 

# # # 

# # 

# 

## 

# # # 

# # # 

# 

# 

## ! 

55°W 

# 

# # # # # # # # # 

Variability in the physical forcing of the Atlantic inflow and the freshwater 

runoff from ice sheets determines the physical gradients and thereby the geographical 

distribution of the plankton communities. The dynamics between 

the physical environment and the variability in the fishery resources in West 

Greenland waters are not fully understood. Thus, a better understanding on 

the recruitment success of fish and shellfish requires comparative studies of 

zooplankton, fish larvae, hydrography and climate, from inshore to offshore 

areas. The exact mechanisms determining plankton community distribution 

and the specific adaptations of these communities to physical and chemical 

gradients are still unknown. To date, no annual surveys have been conducted 

on primary and zooplankton production with the hydrography in the assessment 

area (except at the mouth of Godthåbsfjorden, in: Arendt et al. 

2010). If addressed, model predictions which include variability in ocean 

temperature, seasonal timing of food and production, spawning stock biomass, 

larval drift, species interactions (cannibalism), for each individual in 

! 

# 

55°W 

! 

# 

# 

# 

# # # 

# 

# 

# 

# 

! 

# # 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

focus should improve our understanding and allow the distribution and recruitment 

for fish and shellfish to be predicted. 

Vulnerability of plankton to anthropogenic impacts should be linked even 

more to local environmental conditions that influence the pelagic food web, 

such as temperature, water circulation and ice occurrence in order for the 

ecological impact of future environmental disturbances associated with climate 

change and increased human activities (e.g. oil exploration) to be understood. 

4.2.7 Zooplankton sensitivity to oil 

In connection with hydrodynamic discontinuities, i.e. spring blooms, fronts, 

upwelling areas or the marginal ice zone, high biological activity in the surface 

waters can be expected. Anthropogenic impacts, e.g. oil pollution, might 

also influence productivity. 

Exposure experiments performed on natural plankton communities (Hjorth 

et al. 2007, Hjorth et al. 2008) and copepods (Hjorth & Dahllöf 2008, Jensen et 

al. 2008b, Hjorth & Nielsen 2011) with pyrene (as a proxy for crude oil) have 

shown reductions in primary production, copepod grazing and production 

and an indirect positive effect on bacterial growth due to substrate release. 

Effects of pyrene have been studied in relation to a wide range of variables 

and life stages of the calanoid copepods Calanus finmarchicus and C. glacialis 

held under three different temperatures (0, 5 and 10º C) (Hjorth & Nielsen 

2011, Grenvald et al. in prep.). 

Adult C. finmarchicus were affected the most by pyrene exposure and 

sensitivity increased in warmer water in contrast to C. Glacialis, which may 

be partly due to buffering from lipid stores. Pyrene had no effect on development 

time for the two first non-feeding nauplii stages but clearly prolonged 

development time from nauplii stage III onwards when they begin to 

graze on phytoplankton. This was most pronounced at the lowest temperature 

(0º C), which suggests that the effects of pyrene exposure would be 

more severe during a spring phytoplankton bloom (~0º C in the upper 50m), 

since reduced grazing on phytoplankton would potentially lead to lower incorporation 

of phytoplankton into lipids with more being left ungrazed to 

sedimentate to the benthic community. The different responses to pyrene 

exposure in relation to food uptake, production and development time of 

the two species and higher water temperatures will not only affect them on a 

species level but will affect the Arctic food chain through a regime-shift to a 

less lipid-rich energy flux. Temperature stimulates C. finmarchicus more than 

C. glacialis, but the former is also more sensitive to oil. Vulnerability of 

plankton to anthropogenic impacts should be linked even more to local environmental 

conditions that influence the pelagic food web, such as temperature, 

water circulation and ice occurrence. The impacts of human activity 

are likely to vary according to season, location and biological activity. High 

biological activity in surface waters can be expected in connection with hydrodynamic 

discontinuities, i.e. spring blooms, fronts, upwelling areas and 

the marginal ice zone. In Arctic marine habitats, the most severe ecological 

consequences of massive anthropogenic impacts (such as oil spills) are to be 

expected in seasons with high biological activity within the pelagic food web 

in the upper 50m. In late summer after Calanus have migrated down to 

where they overwinter above the seabed biomass of grazers in surface waters 

is low (Dünweber et al. 2010) and biological activity is lower or concen- 

73

74 

trated at the pycnocline, ecological damage from an oil spill on plankton 

communities can be assumed to be less severe (Söderkvist et al. 2006). 

4.3 Macrophytes 

Susse Wegeberg (AU) 

Shorelines with a rich primary production are of high ecological significance. 

The littoral and sublittoral canopy of macroalgae is important for 

higher trophic levels of the food web by providing substrate for sessile animals, 

shelter from predation, protection against wave action, currents and 

desiccation or directly as a food source (Bertness et al. 1999, Lippert et al. 

2001). Because of strong biological interactions in rocky intertidal and kelp 

forest communities, cascades of delayed, indirect impacts of oil contamination 

(e.g., biogenic habitat loss and changes in prey-predator balances due to 

species specific mortality) may be much more severe than a direct impact of 

oil contamination as seen after the Exxon Valdez spill (Peterson et al. 2003). 

However, some shorelines are highly impacted by natural parameters such 

as wave action and ice scouring, and such shorelines will therefore naturally 

sustain a relatively lower production or may appear as barren grounds. So, 

to identify important or critical areas a robust baseline knowledge on littoral 

and sublittoral ecology is essential. 

Investigation of the marine benthic flora in the assessment area is scarce and 

has mainly been conducted as floristic studies. Marine macroalgae were collected 

on different expeditions to Greenland during the 19 th century, and 

were identified and described by Rosenvinge (1893, 1898). In addition, 

Christensen (1975, 1981) worked in the Nuuk area and an investigation of 

marine ecology in the littoral zone (ECOTIDE) has been initiated in Kobberfjord 

close to Nuuk. A check-list and distribution of the marine algae of 

Greenland for the east and west coast separately was compiled by Pedersen 

(1976) (Table 1). Moreover, a recent study assessed the extension and production 

of kelp belts along Greenland’s West coast, from Nuuk to north of 

Qaanaaq (Krause-Jensen et al. 2011) 


The marine macroalgae are found along shorelines with hard and stable 

substratum, such as stones, boulders and rocky coast. The vegetation is distinctly 

divided in zones, which are most pronounced in areas with high tidal 

amplitudes. Some species grow above the high-water mark, the supralittoral 

zone, where sea water reaches them as sea water dust, spray or by wave action. 

In the littoral zone the vegetation is alternately immersed and emersed, 

and characterised by fucoid species. The majority of the macroalgal species, 

however, grows below the low water mark within water depths with sufficient 

light. In the Arctic, the length of the ice-free period is an important controller 

of the light reaching the sea floor and the depth range of the kelp belt 

increases from north towards south along Greenland’s coast parallel to the 

increase in length of the ice-free period (Krause-Jensen et al. 2011). In north 

Greenland, a relatively dense macroalgal flora can be found down to water 

depths of about 20 m (Krause-Jensen et al. 2011), while they occur deeper 

than 50 m in South Greenland and around Disko (Wegeberg et al. 2005, 

Hansen et al. 2012a).

The coastal zone of the assessment area normally has open water year round 

but may be impacted by drift ice. This ice as well as the marked seasonal 

changes in light regime and low water temperatures call for efficient adaptative 

strategies. The ability to support a photosynthetic performance comparable 

to that of macroalgae in temperate regions might be explained by low 

light compensation points and relatively low respiration rates during periods 

of poor light conditions, and indicates an adaptation to constant low 

temperatures and long periods of low light intensities (Borum et al. 2002). 

Furthermore, a fast response in photosynthetic performance to changing 

light conditions is considered to be part of a physiological protection strategy 

in a highly variable environment as in, e.g., the littoral zone, as well as to 

ensure optimal harvest of light when available (Krause-Jensen et al. 2007, 

Becker et al. 2009). No studies elucidating the macroalgal production or photosynthetic 

strategies have been conducted in the assessment area, though. 

The sea ice also exerts a high physical impact factor on the macroalgal vegetation 

because of ice scouring. The mechanical scouring of floating ice floes 

prevents especially perennial fucoid species establishing in the littoral zone, 

which is the zone mostly influenced by the ice dynamics. Even though the 

assessment area is an open water region (Mosbech et al. 1996b) pack ice from 

Baffin Bay and East Greenland may impact exposed coast lines, which then 

may be subject to the phenomenon of opportunistic green algae development. 

Perennial species from the littoral zone do tolerate temperatures at or close 

to freezing, and might survive at an ice foot, when this phenomenon occasionally 

occurs in the assessment area, and the ice foot melts without disrupting 

the vegetation. It was shown for Fucus distichus from Spitsbergen 

that the species was able to halt the photosynthetic activities at subzero temperatures 

and resume almost completely when unfrozen (Becker et al. 2009). 

Water of low salinity or fresh water may influence the macroalgal vegetation 

especially in the intertidal zone when exposed to rain and snow during low 

tide and when sea water mixes with fresh and melt water during seasons 

with high water run off from land. Low tolerance to hyposaline conditions 

may result in bleaching (strong loss of pigments) or increased mortality, 

which suggests that hyposalinity may impact on the photosynthetic apparatus, 

as shown for kelp species at Spitsbergen (Karsten 2007). 

Substratum characteristics are also important for the distribution and abundance 

of macroalgal vegetation, and only hard and stable substratum can 

serve as a base for a rich community of marine, benthic macroalgae. However, 

commonly some macroalgal species are attached to shells, small stones or 

occur loose-lying in localities with a soft, muddy bottom. Naturally occurring 

loose-lying macroalgae tend to be depauperate, probably due to poor 

light and nutrient conditions. When not attached to stable substratum the 

algal material drifts and clusters result in self-shading and nutrient deficiency 

within the algal cluster. Furthermore, soft bottom localities, often located 

in the inner parts of fjords, are created and influenced by resuspended particles 

in melt water. The light conditions are impacted due to significantly reduced 

water transparency as well as sedimentation of resuspended particles 

on the macroalgal tissue results in shading. Along the coasts of the calm 

fjords around Nuuk in the assessment area loose-lying macroalgae of brown 

and green algae was observed by Christensen (1981). 

75

76 

Sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis) are the most forceful grazers 

on kelp forests. A high density of sea urchins can result in grazing down 

of kelp forests leaving ‘barren grounds’ of stones, boulders and rocks, which 

may be covered by coralline red algae only. If barren grounds are due to 

grazing by sea urchins and not by ice scouring, the barren grounds will be 

found below the intertidal vegetation as the sea urchins do not tolerate desiccation 

(Christensen 1981). 

Isotope (δ 13 C) analyses used to trace kelp-derived carbon in Norway suggest 

that kelp may serve as carbon source for marine animals at several trophic 

levels (e.g., bivalves, gastropods, crab, fish), and mainly enters the food web 

as particulate organic material (Fredriksen 2003). Especially during the dark 

winter period when phytoplankton is absent, an increased dependence on 

kelp carbon has been measured (Dunton & Schell 1987). A study on fishmacrofauna 

interactions in a Norwegian kelp forest showed that kelpassociated 

fauna was important prey for the 21 fish species caught in the 

kelp forest (Norderhaug et al. 2005). A reduction in kelp forest cover due to 

harvest thus affected the fish abundance and diminished coastal seabird foraging 

efficiency (Lorentsen et al. 2010). 

Climate change will probably affect the macroalgal vegetation, primarily 

due to a longer season with less ice and thereby a longer season for growth. 

A change in northward distribution of species is therefore an scenario expected 

to be coupled to oceanic warming (Müller et al. 2009). Furthermore, a 

study of climate forcing on benthic vegetation in Greenland (Krause-Jensen 

et al. 2011) suggests that depth range, abundance and growth of subtidal 

vegetation belts will expand in correlation to a warmer climate; but the 

study also concluded that those species with the most northern distribution 

responded negatively to warming. In addition, melting of inland ice caps 

leads to an increase in freshwater runoff, which may result in lowered salinity 

and increasing water turbidity (Borum et al. 2002, Rysgaard & Glud 2007), 

having a negative impact on the local macroalgae vegetation. 

There are different reports on the impact of oil contamination on macroalgal 

vegetations and communities. The macroalgal cover lost in connection with 

the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989, as observed for Fucus gardneri PC Silva in 

Prince William Sound, has taken years to fully re-establish as a result of the 

grazer-macroalgae dynamics as well as intrinsic changes in plant growth 

and survival (Driskell et al. 2001), and is still considered to be recovering 

(NOAA 2010). In contrast, no major effects on shallow sublittoral macroalgae 

were observed in a study conducted by Cross et al. (1987). It was discussed 

that this might be due to a similar lack of impact on the herbivores as 

well as the vegetative mode of reproduction in the dominant macroalgal 

species. Thus, it has been shown that petroleum hydrocarbons interfere with 

the sex pheromone reaction in the life history of Fucus vesiculosus 

(Derenbach & Gereck 1980). 

4.3.2 The macroalgal vegetation in the assessment area 

A checklist and distribution of the marine macroalgal species in the assessment 

area are presented in Table 1 based on Pedersen (1976) and Andersen 

et al. (2005). Caution should be taken in interpreting the species distribution 

as the species list is a positive list, which means that the species was registered 

if it was collected and identified.

183 macroalgal species (excl. the bluegreen algae, Cyanophyta) are listed for 

Greenland according to the compiled checklist from 1976 (Pedersen 1976). 

Due to taxonomic and nomenclatural changes the number presently equals 

137 species; 37 red algal species, 66 brown and 37 green. Within the assessment 

area 34 red algae, 51 brown and 33 green have been recorded. 

The brown algae Laminaria solidungula, Punctaria glacialis, Platysiphon vertillatus 

and the red algae Haemescharia polygyna, Neodilsea integra, Devalerea ramentacea, 

Turnerella pennyi and Pantoneura fabriciana are considered as Arctic 

endemics (Wulff et al. 2009). Of these species L. solidungula, D. ramentacea, T. 

pennyi and P. fabriciana are present in the assessment area. 

On sea floors with soft sediment, as in some places in the fjords around 

Nuuk, loose-lying macroalgae, or macroalgae attached to small stones and 

shells, may occur. These drifting algae masses are often dominated by 

Desmarestia aculeata and other filamentous brown algae. In areas of the fjords 

with enriched waters the green algae Enteromorpha spp. may be substantial 


In addition, in the shallow soft bottom areas of some of the inner branches of 

the Nuuk fjord system, meadows of eelgrass cover the sea floor and reach 

high abundances (Krause-Jensen et al. 2011). 

Another interesting feature in the fjords of Nuuk is the sole registration of 

the geniculate coralline red algae Corallina officinalis in Greenland 


In proximity to Nuuk, in the assessment area, sea floor covered by coralline 

red algae (Fig. 4.3.1) is observed (M. Blicher, pers. comm.). Both encrusting 

coralline red algae on stones and the loose-lying, branched forms, rhodliths, 

are present. The processes leading to rhodolith accumulations are poorly 

understood, but the rhodoliths are most likely derived from branches breaking 

off from branched encrusting coralline red algal species or developed as 

branched, crusts overgrowing a pebble or a mussel/shell, which may act as 

a nodule (Freiwald 1995). 

Such areas dominated by encrusting coralline red algae as well as rhodoliths 

are reported from a couple of other localities in Greenland; in the Disko 

Fjord and close to Qaqortoq. The locality in Qaqortoq is of the same type as 

those identified close to Nuuk, i.e. stony sea floor with encrusting coralline 

red algae and rhodoliths intermixed (AM Mortensen, pers. comm.). In Disko 

Fjord relatively large rhodoliths with diameters of up to 13 cm (Düwel & 

Wegeberg 1990, Thormar 2006) are accumulated on a soft and muddy bottom. 

The occurrence of coralline red algal dominated habitats seems to be closely 

correlated to the presence and frequency of sea urchins. According to Bulleri 

et al. (2002) grazing by sea urchins plays a fundamental role in establishing 

and maintaining areas dominated by encrusting coralline red algae and 

hence rhodoliths. The grazing down of foliose macroalgae by the sea urchins 

leaves the calcite incrusted red algal species with available substratum and 

optimal light conditions. Thereafter, as investigated in temperate regions, 

the coralline red algae covering the available substratum may prevent recruitment 

of erect macroalgae, maintaining the alternative habitat (Bulleri et 

al. 2002). 

77

Figure 4.3.1. Stones at the sea 

bottom covered by encrusting 

coralline red algae and looselying, 

branched forms, rhodoliths, 

intermixed. A number of sea 

urchin, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis, 

are apparent. (Photo: 

Martin E. Blicher). 

78 

The sea urchin, Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis, occurs frequently in the coralline 

red algal dominated area (Fig. 4.3.1) (ME Blicher, pers. comm.) and is 

considered as very dominant in Kobberfjord in the assessment area (Blicher 

et al. 2009). 

In general, the existing knowledge of macroalgal diversity is very limited, 

and macroalgal species composition, biomass, production and spatial variation 

are largely unknown in the assessment area. Therefore, important or 

critical shoreline intervals cannot be identified based on the available information. 

In addition, at present only limited research addresses the littoral 

zone and no research has been conducted on subtidal macroalgal community 

interactions in the assessment area. Hence, the knowledge of biodiversity/abundance 

of macroalgal associated fauna or mapping of macroalgal 

/faunal interactions including grazing by, e.g., sea urchins, is lacking. 

Therefore, it is suggested that investigations are preformed to provide data 

and further information on: 

• Diversity and spatial variation of the marine flora and associated fauna 

in the littoral and sublittoral zones 

• Macroalgal and associated faunal biomass as well as species specific 

coverage or number 

• Benthic primary production 

Studies of this nature would provide robust data for mapping and modelling 

the littoral and sublittoral ecology of the Davis Strait coast of Greenland. 

This would optimise the advisory and assessment capability for shoreline 

protection and clean-up in relation to oil activities, as well as evaluation of 

subsequent rehabilitation of an oil impacted coast.

Table 4.3.1. Distribution of macroalgal species in the assessment area based on Pedersen 

(1976). Binomial names follow Pedersen (2011). 

Latitude (°N) 62 63 64 65 66 67 

Cyanophyta 

Calothrix scopulorum 

Rivularia atra 

Gloeocapsopsis crepidinum 

Pseudophormidium battersii 

Chroococcopsis amethystea 

Rhodophyta 

Scagelothamnion pusillum 

Porphyra “njordii” 

Ceramium sp. 

Peyssonellia rosenvingii 

Rhodophysema elegans 

Bangia fuscopupurea 

Clathromorphum compactum 

Coccotylus truncatus incl. Coccotylus brodiaei 

Devaleraea ramentacea 

Euthora cristata 

Fimbrifolium dichotomum 

Hildenbrandia rubra 

Lithothmanion glaciale 

Lithothamnion tophiforme 

Meiodiscus spetsbergensis 

Membranoptera denticulata 

Palmaria palmata 

Pantoneura fabriciana 

Phycodrys rubens 

Phymatolithon tenue 

Ptilota serrata 

Polysiphonia arctica 

Polysiphonia stricta 

Porphyra umbilicalis 

Rhodocorton purpureum 

Rhodomela lycopodioides 

Turnerella pennyi 

Wildemania miniata 

Boreophyllum birdiae 

Pyropia thulaea 

Rubrointrusa membranacea 

Corallina officinalis 

Polysiphonia elongata f. schübeleri 

Acrochaetium secundatum 

Phaeophyceae 

Ectocarpus fasciculatus 

Eudesme virescens 

Papenfusiella callitricha 

Saccharina longicruris 

Agarum clathratum 

Alaria pylaiei 

Ascophyllum nodosum 

79

80 

Battersia arctica 

Chaetopteris plumosa 

Chorda filum 

Chordaria flagelliformis 

Delamarea attenuata 

Desmarestia aculeata 

Desmarestia viridis 

Dictyosiphon foeniculaceus 

Ectocarpus siliculosus 

Elachista fusicola 

Fucus distichus 

Fucus vesiculosus 

Halosiphon tomentosus 

Isthmoplea sphaerophora 

Laminaria nigripes 

Laminaria solidungula 

Laminariocolax aecidioides 

Laminariocolax tomentosoides 

Leptonematella fasciculata 

Lithosiphon filiformis 

Petalonia fascia 

Petroderma maculiforme 

Pleurocladia lacustris 

Punctaria plantaginea 

Pylaiella littoralis 

Rafsia fungiformis 

Saccharina latissima 

Saccorhiza dermatodea 

Scytosiphon lomentaria 

Sorapion kjellmanii 

Stictyosiphon tortilis 

Stragularia clavata 

Streblonema stilophorae 

Sphacelorbus nanus 

Coilodesme bulligera 

Hincksia ovata 

Pogotrichum filiforme 

Coelocladia arctica 

Dictyosiphon chordaria 

Pilinia rimosa 

Ralfsia ovata 

Omphallophyllum ulvaceum 

Ralfsia verrucosa 

Streblonema fasciculatum 

Chlorophyta 

Ulva lactuca 

Enteromorpha intestinalis 

Prasiola stipitata 

Pseudopringsheimia confluens 

Acrosiphonia arcta 

Acrosiphonia sonderi

Chaetomorpha capillaris 

Chaetomorpha melagonium 

Chlorochytrium cohnii 

Chlorochytrium dermatocolax 

Cladophora rupestris 

Enteromorpha compressa 

Enteromorpha prolifera 

Gomontia polyrhiza 

Kornmannia leptoderma 

Monostroma grevillei 

Ostreobium quekettii 

Pseudothrix groenlandica 

Percursaria percursa 

Pringsheimiella scutata 

Protomonostroma undulatum 

Rhizoclonium riparium 

Spongomorpha aeruginosa as Chlorochytrium 

inclusum 

Ulothrix flacca 

Ulothrix speciosa 

Ulvaria spelndens 

Urospora wormskioldii 

Urospora penicilliformis 

Acrochaete flustrae 

Bolbocoleon piliferum 

Derbesia marina 

Rosenvingiella constricta 

Rosenvingiella polyrhiza 

Blidingia minima 

4.4 Benthos 

Martin Blicher (GINR) & Mikael Sejr (AU) 

The benthic habitat has a central role in the marine ecosystem in the Arctic, 

in terms of elemental cycling, ecosystem function, and biodiversity. The benthic 

flora is confined to a relatively narrow photic zone extending from the 

inter-tidal zone to approximately 40 m depth. The biomass and production 

of perennial kelps can be significant and the large macroalgae create specific 

habitats with a characteristic associated fauna. The benthic fauna is more 

widespread and is found at all depths and all types of substrate. The benthic 

fauna is often very species rich and more than 100 different species per m 2 

are typically found in undisturbed soft sediments (Sejr et al. 2010a, Sejr et al. 

2010b). Three benthic species are fished commercially in Greenland waters. 

The scallop (Chlamys islandica) and the snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) live directly 

on the sea floor, whereas the northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) is 

found closely associated with the bottom. Moreover, there have been attempts 

to develop commercial exploitation of blue mussels (Mytilus edulis), 

sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus sp.) and sea cucumbers (Cucumaria sp.). 

The benthic community is affected by a multitude of different biological and 

physical parameters; with temperature, depth, food input, sediment composition, 

particle load, disturbance level (e.g. ice scouring) and hydrographical 

81

82 

regime being the most prominent (e.g. Gray 2002, Wlodarska-Kowalczuk et 

al. 2004, Piepenburg 2005). Therefore the benthic community is often extremely 

heterogeneous on both local and regional scales. 

The coastline in Southwest Greenland (62-67°N) is traversed by numerous 

fjords, many of them acting as direct links between the inland ice sheet and 

the ocean. Moreover, many islands are scattered directly off the coast resulting 

in an extremely long coastline and a variety of shallow benthic habitats. 

The continental shelf most often extends >100 km offshore. A mix of shallow 

banks (300 m) results in a highly complex bathymetry 

in the shelf area. 

4.4.1 Fauna 

Considering the extremely long coastline of Greenland the number of benthic 

surveys is limited. Still, there have been reports of high standing stocks 

of macrofauna (>1000 g wet weight m -2 ) in shallow benthic habitats in 

Greenland (

egistered in the area. A similar pattern was found on a local scale along a 

fjord-ocean transect in the Godthaabsfjord/Fylla Bank area (64°N). Here, up 

to >80 species per 0.1 m 2 grab sample were reported, and large differences in 

habitat characteristics between the 9 sampling stations (47-956 m in depth) 

affected the species composition significantly, resulting in a high total species 

richness (339 species) (Sejr et al. 2010a). In the two studies, species accumulation 

curves (i.e. plots of no. of species vs. no. of samples) showed no 

sign of reaching an asymptote, which suggested the ‘true’ number of species 

to be considerably higher than observed. An increase in sampling effort is 

therefore likely to lead to the observation of new species. These two data sets 

contributed to a recent pan-Arctic inventory of macro- and megabenthic 

species including all existing data from Arctic shelf regions. Although a lack 

of data from Greenland waters was apparent, enough data was available to 

suggest species diversity in West Greenland to be in the high end compared 

to other ecoregions in the Arctic (Piepenburg et al. 2010). 

In May 2010 another benthic sampling campaign was performed in the nearshore 

area between 64 and 61°N (Batty et al. 2010). Detailed taxonomic data 

are not yet available, but the sampling is expected to provide data on benthic 

biomass, abundance, diversity and species composition as well as the physico-chemical 

characteristics of the sediment. Visual examinations of the seabed 

using an underwater drop camera down to 250 m in depth indicated 

that the sea floor was very heterogeneous. Several substrate types were registered 

ranging from soft mud and clay to a mix of stones and shells, and 

clean rock. The species composition of epifauna was obviously influenced by 

these different physical conditions, and several different epifaunal communities 

were identified. Due to the reported heterogeneity in the area, it can be 

expected to host several different assemblages of epi- and endobenthic species. 

As regards the functional role of the benthos in the assessment area, recent 

studies in coastal areas indicate that macrozoobenthos are key both in terms 

of elemental cycling and ecosystem function. In Kobbefjord (64°N) the annual 

carbon demand of the dominating species, sea urchins (Strongylocentrotus 

droebachiensis, Fig. 4.3.1) and scallops (Chlamys islandica), corresponded to as 

much as 21-45% of the pelagic primary production (Blicher et al. 2009). 

Moreover, it is well established that macrozoobenthos stimulate microbial 

mineralisation of organic material through bioturbation and bioirrigation, 

and faeces production (Glud et al. 2003, Vopel et al. 2003, Glud et al. 2010). 

The functional importance of shallow macrofauna was further demonstrated 

in a study in Nipisat Sound (64°N), a key habitat for wintering eiders. Here 

it was estimated that eiders consumed a significant fraction of the available 

macrofauna biomass to balance their costs of living during their wintering. 

Their energy demand corresponded to as much as 58% of the total annual 

production of macrobenthos in the area (Blicher et al. 2011). 

Thus, the available studies from the assessment area agree with the results 

from other areas in Greenland, and in the Arctic as a whole, in that the benthic 

habitat plays a key role in terms of biodiversity and ecosystem function. 

However, the lack of studies of spatial and temporal variation in community 

structure, and the lack of data from certain habitat types and from offshore 

areas make it difficult to draw more detailed conclusions. 

One obvious problem as regards quantitative taxonomical studies of benthos 

is that the majority of samples have been collected at sites with soft sediment 

83

84 

due to the technical difficulties of quantitative sampling on hard or mixed 

substrates. As a consequence, our knowledge about the benthic communities 

associated with such heterogeneous habitats is limited, despite the fact that 

such habitats are widespread in coastal areas in Greenland. A specific taxon 

that is receiving increasing attention is cold-water corals. These corals are 

widespread in large parts of the north Atlantic where they create a unique 

habitat that is inhabited by a specific fauna (Mortensen & Buhl-Mortensen 

2004, Bryan & Metaxas 2006). Cold water corals have been found in the 

western part of the Davis Strait (Edinger et al. 2007). In Greenland waters 

knowledge of coral distribution and abundance has not been systematically 

studied. However, during trawl surveys conducted in Greenland waters, 

corals have been found at many locations along the continental slope of 

Southwest- and Southeast Greenland (ICES 2010a). Recently, a ban against 

trawling in two areas south of Maniitsoq (64°N) was suggested due to the 

observations of high abundance of corals. 

4.5 Sea ice community 

Susse Wegeberg (AU) 

At least part of the assessment area is considered an open water region, so 

sea ice and thereby sea ice communities may be less important in the area 

compared with in areas with more extensive sea ice cover north of the assessment 

area. However, in most winters the western part of the assessment 

area is covered with pack ice from the Canadian side (Fig. 3.3.2) and sea ice 

also occurs regularly in the fjords of the assessment area. Thus, the production 

of these ice communities may be of greater importance in some years, at 

times when the pelagic and benthic productions are relatively low, especially 

before the spring bloom of phytoplankton. In addition, the sea ice community 

is expected to be very vulnerable to oil spills as the ice may catch 

and accumulate oil in the interface between ice and sea and the oil may penetrate 

the ice through brine channels, and both these areas represent the 

spaces occupied by sea ice communities. 

The sea ice in the assessment area may be habitat for a specialised ecosystem 

of bacteria as well as many species of microalgae and microfauna. Within 

the assessment area, in the fjord Kangerluarsunnguaq (Kobbefjord), just 

south of Nuuk, Mikkelsen et al. (2008) found that flagellates (prasinophytes, 

dinoflagellates, cryptophytes) and both centric and pennate diatoms were 

regular components of the sea ice algal community. Of diatoms especially 

Chaetoceros simplex, a colonial, centric diatom, was dominant (75% of total 

sea ice algal abundance) during its bloom in March. In the pack ice on the 

Canadian side of the Davis Strait, Booth (1984) found a total dominance of 

pennate diatom genera. 

Strong patchiness of the sea-ice algae is commonly reported in the Arctic 

(Booth 1984, Gosselin et al. 1997, Gradinger et al. 1999, Rysgaard et al. 2001, 

Quillfeldt et al. 2009), caused by heterogeneity of the ice. Changes in ice 

thickness, crystalline structure, salinity, porosity and density are important 

for the community structure of sea ice organisms. Sea ice environments are 

highly dynamic and display large variations in temperature, salinity and nutrient 

availability. These variations lead to the high degree of horizontal 

patchiness in microbial sea ice communities (Quillfeldt et al. 2009).

The sea ice algal production in the Arctic has been estimated to reach 5-15 g 

C m -2 year -1 depending on sea ice cover season (Gosselin et al. 1997, 

Quillfeldt et al. 2009). However, Michel et al. (2002) found that ice algae only 

represented a small fraction of the total algal biomass,

86 

Right before the females extrude the eggs the male attaches a spermatophore 

to the female. On extrusion of the eggs the females carry them on their legs 

for approximately 6-9 months. 

Distribution: The northern shrimp is an expansive species (Bergstrom 2000) 

with a circumpolar occurrence. In West Greenland shrimps are distributed 

along the entire coastline at depths ranging from 9- 1,450 m, but are most 

common at 100-600 m in depth. However the striped pink shrimp is more 

abundant in shallow and costal water (Simpson et al. 1970). In recent years 

the extension area for northern shrimp has moved northwards (Ziemer et al. 

2010) and the main biomass is now concentrated north of 67°N. 

Movements: The shrimps are highly mobile both horizontally and vertically 

and have a diurnal migration where they forage at the bottom during daytime 

and in the pelagic foodweb at night (Horsted & Smidth 1956). 

Breeding distribution: The shrimps migrate horizontally into the inshore shallow 

areas in order to spawn (Hjort & Ruud 1938, Horsted & Smidth 1956, 

Haynes & Wigley 1969, Bergstrom 1991) and the northern shrimp spawns in 

Greenland waters during April (Horsted 1978). 

Population size: The northern shrimp stock is assessed as a single population. 

The total biomass of northern shrimp in West Greenland has increased since 

the early 1990s, reaching its highest level in 2005 and decreasing since. However, 

total biomass in 2010 appears to be above the level where it can produce 

its maximum sustainable yield and is above the average for the entire 

time series (Hammeken & Kingsley 2010). Since 2007 the stock has declined 

in the assessment area as the population of northern shrimp has contracted 

northwards (Ziemer et al. 2010). The recruitment of northern shrimp has 

been low since 2006, but the reason for this is uncertain (Ziemer et al. 2010). 

Pedersen & Storm (2002) and Koeller (2009) suggest that the recruitment of 

shrimps is dependent on food availability. 

Buch et al. (2003) has shown a tight relationship between the occurrence of cod 

and the disappearance of shrimps. Nevertheless in recent years the estimated 

biomass of cod has been very low and there must therefore be other explanations 

for the decline in biomass. It would be reasonable to look into the matchmismatch 

theory for shrimp egg hatching and the peak of phytoplankton 

bloom in order to investigate possible correlations (Wieland & Hovgaard 

2009). 

Sensitivity and impacts of oil spill: Boertmann et al. (2009) assumed that fish 

and shrimp larvae are more sensitive to oil than adults, but consequences for 

survival, the impacts of annual recruitment strength and subsequent population 

size are unknown. The shrimp larvae have a pelagic phase and the resources 

will be especially sensitive to oil spill in that season. 

Knowledge gaps: Early life history of shrimp, including larval drift between 

offshore and inshore sites and along the west coast, nursery grounds as well 

as settling and occurrence of benthic stages is unknown or poorly understood 

in the assessment area. Furthermore, there is a need to understand 

whether or not there is a link between shrimp recruitment and climate 

changes due to a mismatch in the timing of shrimp larval hatching and the 

peak of the phytoplankton bloom in West Greenland. The underlying mechanisms 

for the dispersal of the northern shrimp stock, moving south (around

1990) and then north (mid-2000s) in West Greenland waters, is poorly understood. 

Whether this movement was caused by increased predation affected 

by the return of cod in southern Greenland, increased bottom temperatures 

or other factors is unknown. The food web interaction between northern 

shrimp and their prey and predators is also poorly understood. 

Snow crab, Chionoecetes opilio 

Biology: Snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio O. Fabricius; Brachyura, Majidae) has a 

wide distribution and is considered to be of arctic-boreal biogeographic affinity, 

because it does not usually extend north of the Arctic Circle into the 

High Arctic (Squires 1990); although there are two exceptions (Paul & Paul 

1997, Burmeister 2002). Snow crab mainly inhabits grounds of mud or sandmud 

substrate at depths from 30 to 1,400 m, where bottom temperature remains 

–1.5 to 4°C year round (e.g., Squires 1990, Dawe & Colbourne 2002). 

Snow crab may be physiologically constrained to these temperatures as its 

energy budget becomes negative outside of the range due to reduced feeding 

and rising metabolic costs (Foyle et al. 1989, Thompson & Hawryluk 

1990). 

As with other brachyuran crabs, the snow crab life cycle features a planktonic 

larval phase and a benthic phase with separate sexes. The mating system 

is complex, with a distinct male dominance hierarchy resulting from intense 

sexual competition favouring larger males (Donaldson & Adams 1989, Elner 

& Beninger 1995, Sainte-Marie et al. 1999, Sainte-Marie & Sainte-Marie 1999). 

Females can reproduce several times in their lifetime, may be quite polygamous 

and have a pair of spermathecae for extended storage of sperm (Elner 

& Beninger 1995, Sainte-Marie et al. 2000). It is accepted that female snow 

crab may produce more than one viable brood from spermatophores stored 

in their spermathecae (Sainte-Marie 1993, Sainte-Marie & Carriere 1995). 

Eggs are incubated beneath the female’s abdomen and hatching and larval 

release occur during late spring or early summer just prior to extrusion of 

the new clutch of eggs, which may or may not be preceded by mating. 

The larvae proceed through three planktonic stages (zoeae I-II, megalops) 

and settle on the bottom in autumn at a carapace width (CW) of approximately 

3 mm. The snow crab spends the rest of its life on the sea floor, where 

it preys on fish, clams, polychaetes and other worms, brittle stars, shrimp, 

other crabs and its own congeners (Lefebvre & Brêthes 1991, Sainte-Marie et 

al. 1997). Crabs grow by moulting, in late winter or spring in the case of 

larger crabs, and both males and females have a terminal moult to adulthood 

(i.e. functional sexual maturity), which occurs over a wide size interval 

(Conan & Comeau 1986, Sainte-Marie & Hazel 1992, Sainte-Marie 1993, 

Sainte-Marie et al. 1999). There is a large sexual size/age dimorphism at 

adulthood, with males living up to approximately 15–16 years and females 

up to about 11–12 years after settlement (Sainte-Marie et al. 1995, Alunno- 

Bruscia & Sainte-Marie 1998, Comeau et al. 1998). The males enter the fishery 

approximately 8-9 years after settlement to benthic stage. 

Distribution: The most northerly record of snow crab is from Greenland, 

where the species is distributed along the west coast between 60°C and 74°N 

in both offshore and inshore (fjords) locations (Burmeister 2002). Greenland 

fjord populations are possibly isolated at the benthic stage, as appears to be 

the case in Canadian fjords (Conan & Comeau 1986, Bernard Sainte-Marie, 

MLI, Canada, pers. comm.). In Greenland, snow crab is generally found at 

87

88 

depths between 100 and 800 m and at bottom water temperatures ranging 

from about –1.0°C to about 4.5°C. 

Movements: The Greenland coastal system consists of fjords and basins. Fjord 

populations of snow crab in the benthic phase are partially or completely 

isolated from one another and from offshore populations by sills 

(Burmeister, unpubl. tagging data, Burmeister & Sainte-Marie 2010). Early 

life history of snow crab including larval drift between offshore and inshore 

sites, nursery grounds, settling and occurrence of benthic stages is unknown 

or poorly understood in the assessment area. Genetic analysis showed that 

snow crab in West Greenland waters differ significantly from those in western 

part of Davis Strait (Atlantic Canada), whereas no difference was found 

between inshore and offshore site subpopulations within this assessment area 

(Puebla et al. 2008). 

Population size: The population occurring in the assessment area has an unfavourable 

conservation status due to years of high fishing pressure. 

Sensitivity and impacts of oil spill: Boertmann et al. (2009) assumed that fish 

and shrimp larvae are more sensitive to oil than adults. Larvae of snow crabs 

might be sensitive to an oil spill as well and consequences for survival, the 

impacts of annual recruitment strength and subsequent population size are 

unknown. In contrast to pelagic fish and crustaceans, benthic stage snow 

crabs are observed not to migrate over larger distances in Greenland, but are 

believed to be stationary. Change in habitats through chemical pollution is 

therefore of particular interest in relation to snow crab, as they might not be 

able to avoid contaminated sediment. A laboratory study on habitat preferences 

for juvenile king crabs (Paralithodes camtschaticus) and Tanner crabs 

(Chionoecetes bairdi) exposed to oil has led to the suggestion that exposure 

time isthat likely to be longer for species intimately associated with sediment 

and pollution might play a larger role in crab population decline 

(Moles & Stone 2002). 

Knowledge gaps: Early life history of snow crab including larval drift between 

offshore and inshore sites and along the Greenland west coast, nursery 

grounds, settling and occurrence of benthic stages is unknown or poorly understood 

in the assessment area. 

Greenland Halibut, Reinhardtius hippoglossoides 

Biology: Greenland halibut is a slow growing deep-water flatfish that is 

widely distributed in the north Atlantic including Baffin Bay, Davis Strait 

and Labrador Sea and inshore areas along the entire west coast of Greenland 

and inshore areas at eastern Canada. The main spawning ground is assumed 

to be located in the central part of the Davis Strait south of the sill between 

Greenland and Baffin Island where spawning takes place in early winter. 

The assumption is based on development of ovaries (Jørgensen 1997, 

Gundersen et al. 2010) and observation of eggs (Smidt 1969). Most sampling 

has been conducted at depths down to about 1,500 m but no females in 

spawning conditions have ever been observed and it is possible that spawning 

takes place at depths greater than 1500 m, probably around 62°30’N - 

63°30’N. From the spawning grounds eggs and larvae drift through the assessment 

area with the West Greenland Current towards the settling areas. 

Early stage eggs are found between 240-640 m (Smidt 1969) and larvae are 

primarily found at 13-40 m (Simonsen & Gundersen 2005). The pelagic stage 

lasts more than six months (Smidt 1969). The larvae settle in August-

September when they have reached a length of about 6-8 cm. Store Hellefiske 

Bank, Disko Bay and Disko Bank west of Disko Island are well documented 

settling and nursery areas (Smidt 1969, Stenberg 2007) but larvae are 

also brought into the Baffin Bay by the West Greenland Current and to the 

East Coast of Canada (Bowering & Chumakov 1989) by a branch of the West 

Greenland Current that flexes towards west at the sill between Greenland 

and Baffin Island. This drift pattern has been strongly supported by observations 

of egg and larvae and by models simulating the drift of Greenland halibut 

eggs and larvae (Stenberg 2007). Elsewhere in the Northwest Atlantic 

spawning has only been observed sporadically in the Baffin Bay and inshore 

in the Northwest Greenland fjords (Simonsen & Gundersen 2005) and along 

the east coast of Canada (Bowering & Brodie 1995). The Greenland halibut 

populations in the Davis Strait, Baffin Bay, inshore areas in Northwest 

Greenland and the east coast of Canada area are therefore believed to be recruited 

from the spawning stock in the Davis Strait. 

Migration: Tagging studies from eastern Canada (Bowering 1984) and West 

Greenland (Boje 2002) and recent unpublished data from Greenland Institute 

of Natural Resources together with studies based on survey data (Jørgensen 

1997) show that Greenland halibut gradually migrates towards greater 

depth and towards the presumed spawning area as they grow, reaching the 

spawning area as adults. One- and to some extend two-year-old fish feed on 

zooplankton in the water column while older fish feed on shrimps, fish and 

squids that are taken either at the sea bottom or during irregular feeding migrations 

into the water column (Jorgensen 1997). 

Sensitivity and impacts of oil spill: The assessment area includes the main 

spawning ground for Greenland halibut in the Northwest Atlantic and recruitment 

to important fishing grounds in the Davis Strait, Baffin Bay, eastern 

Canada and inshore waters in Northwest Greenland and Canada is dependent 

on recruitment from this area. Eggs and larvae that drift slowly 

though the assessment area (Simonsen et al. 2006, Stenberg 2007) at depths 

of 13-40 m are very vulnerable to oil if exposed to a large subsurface plume. 

In such a case, effects on recruitment to the fishery should be expected. 

Tainting by oil residues in fish meat is a severe problem related to oil spills. 

Fish exposed even to very low concentrations of oil in the water, in their 

food or in the sediment where they live may be tainted, leaving them useless 

for human consumption (GESAMP 1993). In the case of oil spills, it will be 

necessary to suspend fishery activities in the affected areas, mainly to avoid 

the risk of marketing fish that are contaminated or even just tainted by oil 

(Rice et al. 1996). This may apply to the Greenland halibut fisheries within 

the assessment area. Large oil spills may cause heavy economic losses due to 

problems arising in the marketing of the products. Strict regulation and control 

of the fisheries in contaminated areas are necessary to ensure the quality 

of the fish available on the market. 

Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua 

Biology: The Atlantic cod is an epibenthic-pelagic species (Coad & Reist 2004) 

and is distributed in a variety of habitats from the shoreline to the continental 

shelf. The cod is an omnivorous species eating anything from invertebrates 

to fish, including younger members of its own species. Atlantic cod 

spawns once a year in batches (Murua & Saborido-Rey 2003). Old and large 

female cod produce more eggs of better quality per female compared to 

young and small female cod. Eggs from old and large females also have a 

higher probability of surviving (Kjørsvik 1994). In Greenland Atlantic cod 

89

90 

spawns in spring (April-May). The eggs and later the larvae drift with the 

currents and the larvae settle in the autumn at lengths of 5-7 cm. Temperature 

has an impact on the abundance as well as the development and survival 

of the eggs (Buckley et al. 2000). 

Distribution and spawning stocks: The Atlantic cod found in Greenland is derived 

from three separate ‘stocks’ that each is labelled by their spawning areas: 

I) historical offshore spawning grounds of East and West Greenland; II) 

spawning grounds in West Greenland fiords; and III) Icelandic spawning 

grounds where the offspring are occasionally transported in significant 

quantities with the Irminger current to Greenland waters. The Icelandic offspring 

generally settle off East and South Greenland, whereas offspring from 

the Greenland offshore spawning is believed mainly to settle off the West 

Greenland coast (Wieland & Hovgaard 2002). The assessment area is therefore 

a potential nursery area for young cod originating from both the Icelandic 

and the offshore Greenlandic stocks. Tagging experiments have 

shown that the offshore stock occasionally migrates to the coastal zone and 

mixes with the inshore stocks (Storr-Paulsen et al. 2004). 

Lumpsucker, Cyclopterus lumpus 

Biology: Mature lumpsucker adults (3-5 years of age) arrive along the Greenland 

coastline throughout the assessment area in early spring (Mosbech et al. 

2004b) and spawn in the following months in shallow waters (Muus & 

Nielsen 1998). The male guards and ventilates the approximately 100,000- 

350,000 eggs for a couple of months (Muus & Nielsen 1998, Sunnanå 2005). 

Based on Norwegian data, the offspring probably spend the first two years 

in the near shore kelp. The adult fish reside in deeper waters outside the 

spawning season, but it is unknown if and to where they migrate outside the 

spawning season. They are, however, occasionally caught in near shore shelf 

areas in bottom trawls (Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, unpublished 

data). The feeding behaviour of Greenland lumpsucker is unknown, 

but due to its poor swimming capabilities it is most likely restricted 

to jellyfish and other slow-moving organisms (Muus & Nielsen 1998). 

Lumpsuckers may constitute a significant prey resource to sperm whales in 

the area, as seen elsewhere (Kapel 1979, Martin & Clarke 1986). 

Distribution: The common lumpsucker is distributed throughout the assessment 

area, and also found at both higher and much lower latitudes (i.e. 

North Sea). Hence, climatic changes will most likely not negatively affect the 

lumpsucker in the assessment area through direct temperature effects. However, 

as little is known about lumpsucker migrations and dependency on 

other ecosystem components, it is unclear how the species would respond to 

climatic changes. 

Sensitivity and impacts of oil spill: Given the dependency of shallow waters 

near coastal areas for spawning, the lumpsucker will be especially sensitive 

to an oil spill on beaches in the spawning period. Other potentially important 

areas, such as feeding areas, are not known. The overall sensitivity 

of lumpsucker was estimated as moderate in an environmental oil spill sensitivity 

atlas for the coastal zone in the area just south (60-62˚N) of the assessment 

area (Mosbech et al. 2004b), and similar conclusions should apply 

in this case.

Salmon, Salmo salar 

Biology and distribution: Atlantic salmon migrates to Greenland from countries 

around the North Atlantic. In Greenland, the only known spawning 

population of Atlantic salmon is located in the Kapisillit river in the inner 

part of the Nuuk fjord, West Greenland (Nielsen 1961). Other rivers that 

could potentially hold a salmon population exist, but in general the rivers of 

Greenland are short, steep and cold (Jonas 1974). Although persistent, the 

contribution of the small Kapisillit population to the salmon fishery around 

Greenland must be regarded as insignificant compared to other countries 

around the North Atlantic. Salmon can be found in the waters around 

Greenland throughout the year, but abundance seems to peak in the autumn 

from August to October. In West Greenland the northern distribution varies 

from year to year, but salmon can be found as far north as the Upernavik 

district around 72 o N. 

Population size: In recent years the overall status of the stocks of both North 

American and European origin contributing to the West Greenland fishery is 

among the lowest recorded, and as a result the abundance of salmon in 

Greenland waters is thought to be extremely low compared to historic levels. 

Capelin, Mallotus villosus 

Distribution: Capelin has a circumpolar distribution and in Greenland it is 

found from the southern tip to 73˚N and 70˚N on the west and east coast, respectively. 

Although not thoroughly documented, known differences in 

maximum length, progressive spawning and well separated fjord systems 

suggest that individual fjord systems contains separate capelin stocks 

(Sorensen & Simonsen 1988, Hedeholm et al. 2010). 

Biology: Sometime during autumn to spring capelin migrates to the fjords, 

where they form dense schools prior to spawning. Spawning takes place in 

shallow water (

92 

(Mosbech et al. 2004b). The recovery time of such an event is unknown, as it 

is still unknown whether each fjord hosts a separate genetically isolated 

stock or if they mix. Additionally within the assessment area, only the near 

coastal shelf area is of importance to capelin and here capelin is not as vulnerable 

as they are highly mobile. Furthermore, because they are pelagic 

feeders they are not as susceptible to long-term effects as benthic feeders. 

Sandeel, Ammodytes spp. 

Biology: Sandeels (or sand lance) are small bentho-pelagic fish with a central 

position in many marine food webs. Two species occur in Greenland: the 

lesser sandeel (Ammodytes marinus) and northern sandeel (A. dubius). They 

are extremely similar and difficult to distinguish, and most surveys have 

recorded sandeels simply as Ammodytes spp. Where they occur in high 

abundance, sandeels are typically a key prey for many seabirds, marine 

mammals and larger fish species. They feed on zooplankton in the pelagic 

zone, mainly copepods, particularly Calanus finmarchicus. Sandeels spend a 

large part of their time buried in sandy sediments and are most active during 

the night, when they swim into the water column to feed. Most of the 

feeding occurs during spring and summer. Sandeels are thus habitat specialists, 

and the highest abundances are found on major sand banks at up to 100 

m depth. However, smaller areas with suitable sandy sediments, e.g. around 

islands where currents are strong, are also likely to be sandeel habitat. 

Distribution: During a large sandeel survey in 1978, exploring the potentials 

for a commercial fishery in Southwest Greenland, the highest sandeel concentrations 

were found at the western and southern edge of Store Hellefiskebanke 

(just north of the assessment area), at the southern edge of 

Toqqusaq Banke (just north of Fyllas Banke), at Fyllas Banke and Fiskernæs 

Banke (Andersen 1985). During a benthic cruise in 2009 very high densities 

of sandeels (on average 9 indv. m -2 ) were found at Store Hellefiskebanke (J. 

Hansen, unpubl.), but no sampling was done within the assessment area. Information 

about the occurrence of sandeel larvae is available from zooplankton 

surveys conducted in June-July in the period 1950 - 1984 (Pedersen & 

Smidt 2000). The larvae were found throughout most of the shelf in the assessment 

area, with the highest abundance at Fyllas Banke, Sukkertoppen 

Banke and Lille Hellefiskebanke (see also section 4.2.5 and Fig. 4.2.4). 

Sensitivity and impacts of oil spill: Being habitat specialists, sandeels are very 

sensitive to localised oil spills, particularly if the oil settles on the sea floor. 

As several important sandeel locations are known from the shelf area, there 

is no question that the assessment area is a critical area for sandeels in West 

Greenland. Earlier studies indicated that sandeels off West Greenland 

spawned during the summer (Andersen 1985), but more recent studies have 

found abundant young larvae during summer (Munk et al. 2003, Simonsen 

et al. 2006), indicating mean hatching dates around 1 May. Given the expected 

large biomass of sandeels in some parts of the assessment area, and 

their central role as prey for a variety of species, impacts on sandeels have 

the potential to indirectly affect a large part of the ecosystem. 

Redfish, Sebastes mentella and Sebastes marinus 

Biology: Four species of redfish live in the North Atlantic but only deep-sea 

redfish (Sebastes mentella) and golden redfish (Sebastes marinus) are common 

in West Greenland waters (Moller et al. 2010). Both deep-sea redfish and 

golden redfish are highly valuable commercial species. Survey indices for 

both redfish species combined in the Greenland shrimp survey varied be-

tween 1 and 2.4 billion individuals from 1992 to 1996 but this has decreased 

since to approximately 84 million individuals in 2009 (Nygaard & Jørgensen 

2010), equivalent to a 25-fold decrease in abundance in 15 years. 

Wolffish, Anarhichas minor, Anarhichas lupus and Anarhichas denticulatus 

Biology: Three species of wolffish live in the waters off Greenland, spotted 

wolffish (Anarhichas minor), Atlantic wolffish (Anarhichas lupus), and northern 

wolffish (Anarhichas denticulatus). Whereas Atlantic wolffish is a highly 

commercial and valuable fish, spotted wolffish is of less commercial interest, 

and northern wolffish of no commercial interest and only consumed in a few 

countries. All three species of wolffish are distributed across the North Atlantic 

from USA to Spitsbergen and the Barents Sea and along the coasts of 

northern Europe. Survey indices indicate that the biomass of Atlantic wolffish 

is very low compared to the mid 1980s and that the biomass of spotted 

wolffish increased between 2002 and 2008. 

American plaice, Hippoglossoides platessoides 

American plaice is distributed throughout the North Atlantic from the coast 

of Murmansk to the southern Labrador and USA. Survey indices indicate 

that the biomass of American plaice in West Greenland water is low compared 

to the 1980s (Nygaard & Jørgensen 2010). 

Thorny skate, Amblyraja radiata 

Thorny skate is distributed throughout the North Atlantic, from Hudson 

Bay along the coast to USA, Greenland to Iceland, the English Channel, the 

Baltic, Svalbard and the Barents Sea. Survey indices indicate that the biomass 

of thorny skate in West Greenland has decreased substantially since 

the 1980s (Nygaard & Jørgensen 2010). 

4.7 Seabirds 

David Boertmann, Flemming Merkel, Anders Mosbech, Kasper Johansen & Daniel 

Clausen (AU) 

Seabirds are an important component in the marine ecosystem of the assessment 

area. The numbers of breeding seabirds are, however relatively 

low compared to the coasts further north in Greenland, in Disko Bay, Upernavik 

and Qaanaaq Districts. The huge breeding colonies found there, do 

not occur in the Davis Strait assessment area (Boertmann et al. 1996). However, 

the assessment area is an extremely important winter quarter for seabirds 

from the entire North Atlantic (Boertmann et al. 2004). 

Seabirds constitute an important resource to the Greenlanders and seabird 

hunting is a popular spare time activity. There are also full time hunters in 

the assessment area, who sell their products incl. seabirds on the local openair 

markets. The seabird hunting is described in chapter 5. The most hunted 

species are thick-billed murre (Uria lomvia), common eider (Somateria mollissima) 

and black-legged kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla). 

The bird hunt is regulated by the governmental order on protection and 

hunting of birds, the most recent one was issued on 8 March 2009. 

93

94 

4.7.1 Breeding seabirds 

Most of the breeding seabirds are colonial breeders and many breeding colonies 

are found dispersed along the coast of the assessment area (Fig. 4.7.1 

and 4.7.2). Colonies vary in size (from a few pairs to more than 20,000 individuals) 

and in species composition, from holding only a single species up to 

ten different species. The seabirds usually forage relatively close to the 

breeding sites, however, two species may potentially undertake much longer 

foraging trips, although not studied within the assessment area. In Qaanaaq, 

thick-billed murres have been recorded to fly more than 100 km to find food 

(Falk et al. 2000) and the northern fulmar (Fulmarus glacialis) is known to 

undertake exceptional long foraging trips lasting several days (e.g., Falk & 

Møller 1997). 

A total of 20 species of seabirds are known to breed regularly along the 

coasts of the assessment area. Of these most are more or less colonial, breeding 

on steep sea-facing cliffs or on low islets (Boertmann et al. 1996). The only 

seabird not breeding in distinct colonies is the Arctic skua (Tab. 4.7.1). In 

addition, a number of species breed at freshwater habitats or on sheltered 

coasts. 

Table 4.7.1. Overview of birds associated with the marine environment of the assessment area. b = breeding, s = summering, 

w = wintering, m = migrant visitor, c = coastal, o = offshore. “Importance of study area to population” indicates the significance 

of the assessment area in a national and international context as defined by Anker-Nilssen (1987). 

Species Occurrence Distribution Red-list status in Importance of 

Greenland study area to popu- 

(Boertmann 2007) lation 

Great northern diver m/s spring, summer, autumn c near threatened (NT) medium 

Red-throated diver b/m/s spring, summer autumn c least concern (LC) medium 

Fulmar b/s/w year-round c & o least concern (LC) low 

Great shearwater s July-October o least concern (LC) low 

Great cormorant s/w year-round c least concern (LC) high 

Mallard b/w winter c least concern (LC) high 

Common eider b/s/m/w year-round c vulnerable (VU) high 

King eider w Oct.-May c least concern (LC) medium 

Long-tailed duck b/m/w year-round c least concern (LC) medium 

Red-breasted merganser b/m/w year-round c least concern (LC) high 

Harlequin duck m/w year-round c (rocky shores) near threatened (NT) high 

Arctic skua b summer c least concern (LC) low 

Black-legged kittiwake b/s/w year-round c & o vulnerable (VU) high 

Herring gull b summer c not evaluated (NA) low 

Glaucous gull b/s/w year-round c & o least concern (LC) medium 

Iceland gull b/s/w year-round c & o least concern (LC) high 

Great black-backed gull b/s/w year-round c & o least concern (LC) medium 

Lesser black-backed gull b April-Sept. c not evaluated (NA) medium 

Arctic tern b May-September c near threatened (NT) low 

Thick-billed murre b/w year-round c & o vulnerable (VU) high 

Common murre b/w year-round c & o endangered (EN) high 

Razorbill b/w year-round c & o least concern (LC) high 

Atlantic puffin b/w year-round c & o near threatened (NT) high 

Black guillemot b/w summer 

c 

least concern (LC) high 

winter 

c & o 

Little auk w September-May o least concern (LC) low 

White-tailed eagle b/w year-round c vulnerable (VU) high

It should be noted that the breeding colonies shown in Figures 4.7.1 and 

4.7.2 represent only a minimum of the true number of colonies present. For 

some species the number of small colonies could easily be twice as many. 

Especially the extensive archipelago between 63˚ and 66˚ N holds a huge potential 

for seabird colonies and this area has not been thoroughly surveyed. 

Furthermore, some colony information may be outdated. Extensive survey 

activity is currently conduced in the archipelago north and south of Nuuk 

(GINR, L. M. Rasmussen, unpubl.). 

4.7.2 Summering seabirds 

The shelf waters of the assessment area are also utilised by non-breeding 

seabirds. Numerous individuals from breeding populations all over the 

North Atlantic – mainly black-legged kittiwakes and northern fulmars (Fulmarus 

glacialis) – move into the Greenland waters in summer. Also included 

here are great shearwaters (Puffinus gravis) breeding in the southern hemisphere. 

In coastal areas other non-breeding seabirds utilise the region in 

summer – ducks arriving from breeding sites in Canada and inland Greenland 

to assemble and moult along the outer coast and in some fjords. Harlequin 

ducks (Histrionicus histrionicus) are found at remote rocky islands, 

while long-tailed ducks (Clangula hyemalis) and red-breasted mergansers 

(Mergus serrator) moult in shallow fjords and bays (Boertmann & Mosbech 

2001, 2002). 

4.7.3 Inland birds 

Inland birds, breeding in freshwater habitats also utilise the marine waters, 

mainly in winter and during migration. These comprise mallards (Anas 

platyrhynchos), long-tailed ducks, red-breasted mergansers, harlequin ducks, 

red-throated divers (Gavia stellata) and great northern divers (Gavia immer) 

(Tab. 4.7.1). As mentioned above some of the ducks may also breed at sheltered 

coasts, while divers often find their food in the marine environment, 

performing regular flights between inland breeding sites and the coast. 

The white-tailed eagle (Haliaeetus albicilla) is also relevant to this assessment 

as it too is associated with the marine environment. 

4.7.4 Wintering seabirds 

As mentioned above, the waters of the assessment area constitute very important 

winter quarters for seabirds. This is due to the fact that sea ice usually 

does not occur in winter – the region is often referred to as the ‘Open Water 

Area’ because the harbours are navigable throughout the year. Seabirds 

from Russia, Iceland, Svalbard and Canada assemble here October-May 

(Boertmann et al. 2004, Boertmann et al. 2006) and it is estimated that more 

than 3.5 million birds winter along the coasts of the Open Water Area. To 

this figure an unknown, but probably very large number (several million) of 

little auks (Alle alle) should be added (Boertmann et al. 2004). 

The seabird wintering sites in the assessment area are therefore of high international 

importance. The most numerous species in winter are common 

eider, king eider (Somateria spectabilis), thick-billed murre and the large gull 

species. The distribution of the wintering seabirds was surveyed in the 

coastal area of West Greenland in 1999 (Merkel et al. 2002, Boertmann et al. 

2004). 

95

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

96 

60°W 

60°W 

Common eider colonies 

Min. number of individuals 

No count 

2 - 10 

11 - 50 

0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

51 - 100 

101 - 200 


60°W 

Black guillemot colonies 


No count 

2 - 50 

51 - 200 

201 - 400 

401 - 1000 


0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 

Thick-billed murre colonies 


765 - 1000 

1001 - 2000 

2001 - 3000 

3001 - 6620 


0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

66°N 

64°N 

60°W 

60°W 

Atlantic puffin colonies 


No count 

2 - 25 

26 - 50 

62°N 

51 - 100 

101 - 280 

Razorbill colonies 


No count 

2 - 25 

26 - 50 

51 - 100 

101 - 239 


0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

Figure 4.7.1. Distribution of seabird breeding colonies of common eider, thick-billed murre, black guillemot, Atlantic puffin and 

razorbill in the assessment area. Maps are based on data from AU and GINR (the Greenland Seabird Colony Register, 2010), 

however, survey coverage is not complete and colony information may be outdated. 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 

Arctic tern colonies 


No count 

2 - 10 

11 - 50 

51 - 100 

0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

66°N 

64°N 

60°W 

101 - 250 

251 - 500 


60°W 

Glaucous gull 


No count 

2 - 10 

11 - 100 

62°N 

101 - 400 

401 - 2100 

Iceland gull colonies 


No count 

2 - 10 

11 - 100 

101 - 400 

401 - 1497 


0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 

60°W 

Lesser black-backed gull 


No count 

2 - 10 

11 - 25 

26 - 100 

101 - 400 

Great black-backed gull 


No count 

2 - 10 

11 - 25 

26 - 100 

101 - 400 


60°W 

Black-legged kittiwake colonies 

Min. number of pairs 

No count 

2 - 50 

51 - 500 

501 - 5000 

5001 - 11337 


0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

Figure 4.7.2. Distribution of seabird breeding colonies of Arctic tern, black-legged kittiwake, glaucous gull, Iceland gull, lesser 

black-backed gull and great black-backed gull in the assessment area. Maps are based on data from AU and GINR (the Greenland 

Seabird Colony Register, 2010), however, survey coverage is not complete and colony information may be outdated. 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

97

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

98 

60°W 

60°W 

No. of overlapping 

surveys 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 


surveys 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

Spring 

50°W 

50°W 

Autumn 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

60°W 


surveys 

1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 


66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 


surveys 

1 

2 

3 

4 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

Summer 

50°W 

50°W 

Winter 

Figure 4.7.3. At-sea distribution of survey effort in the assessment area, shown as the number of overlapping ship- and aerial 

surveys conducted during spring (Apr-May), summer (Jun-Aug), autumn (Sep-Dec) and winter (Jan-Mar). White areas represent 

areas with no survey activity. The figures do not include all surveys conducted in the assessment area, only what was available 

in two shared AU/GINR survey databases at the time of data extraction, corresponding to 25 ship surveys (1988-2010) and 3 

aerial surveys (1996-2009). 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

Knowledge on habitat use of the wintering seabirds and the factors governing 

their distribution is generally poor, especially for the offshore area. Despite 

the unknowns it is evident that, seen in a North Atlantic perspective, 

the waters off West Greenland are very important for seabirds (Barrett et al. 

2006). 

4.7.5 Selected species 

A number of seabird species important for the assessment area are briefly 

described in the following pages. For some species, the at-sea distribution is 

shown for different seasons of the year, based on available ship and aerial 

survey data collected in the period 1988-2010. At the time of data extraction 

this corresponded to 25 ship surveys (1988-2010) and 3 aerial surveys (1996- 

2009). Seabird densities were calculated as follows. The original survey transects 

were split into 3 km segments, and for each segment a density was calculated 

on the basis of the number of birds of the particular seabird species 

observed, the length of the segment, and an effective search width estimated 

separately for each survey and species by means of distance sampling methods 

(Buckland et al. 2001). Survey by survey the densities were interpolated 

to 3x3 km raster grids by inverse distance weighting (power 2, radius 15 

km), and the densities shown on the maps represent the mean value in an 

overlay analysis of these grids (divided into four seasons). Densities were 

calculated only within a 15 km buffer around the survey transects. Note that 

the number of overlapping surveys varies markedly between seasons and 

areas (Fig. 4.7.3). 

Northern Fulmar, Fulmarus glacialis 

The number of breeding fulmars in the assessment area is very low, probably 

no more than a few hundred pairs, and, moreover, the few colonies seem 

to be unstable in time and space (Boertmann et al. 1996). 

In the offshore areas fulmars are numerous and occur almost everywhere, 

except for in winter when only few are present (Fig. 4.7.4). They usually 

avoid areas with high ice coverage. Concentrations are linked to foraging areas 

and such may occur at ice edges, upwelling areas and areas with commercial 

fisheries. 

The fulmar has a favourable conservation status in Greenland and it is not 

included on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007, listed as of ‘Least 

Concern’ (LC)). 

Fulmars have medium sensitivity to oil spills both on an individual level 

and a population level. Breeding colonies are among the most sensitive areas, 

because fulmars often rest on the water surface here. Recurrent offshore 

concentration areas are not known, but may occur e.g. at upwelling areas. 

99

Figure 4.7.4. At-sea distribution of northern fulmar in the assessment area during spring (Apr-May), summer (Jun-Aug), autumn 

(Sep-Dec) and winter (Jan-Mar) based on available ship survey and aerial survey data collected in 1988 - 2010. Note that survey 

coverage and density scale varies between seasons. 

100

Great shearwater, Puffinus gravis 

This is a visitor form the southern hemisphere where it breeds on the islands 

of Tristan da Cunha. The birds migrate in the southern winter to the northern 

hemisphere’s summer, where they stay, mainly on the Grand Banks and 

the West Greenland banks until September. 

They occasionally occur in high densities in the assessment area (Fig. 4.7.5), 

although their numbers seems to vary a great deal from one year to another. 

High numbers of moulting birds with reduced flying abilities have been reported 

(Salomonsen 1950) and such concentrations will be highly sensitive 

to oil spills. 

The great shearwater is listed as Least Concern (LC) in Greenland 

(Boertmann 2007) and is also considered as of Least Concern (LC) on the international 

red list (IUCN 2010). 

Great Cormorant, Phalacrocorax carbo 

The cormorant breeds in small colonies usually with less than 100 pairs. 

Within the region these are found in the northern half, with Evighedsfjorden 

as the most important area. In 1995 the population numbered about 160 

pairs (Boertmann & Mosbech 1997), but this is probably much higher today. 

At least the population has expanded to the south and coverage now includes 

the Godthåbsfjord (AU unpubl.). 

The outer coast of the assessment area is an important winter habitat for 

cormorants, including breeding birds from areas further north in West 

Greenland (Lyngs 2003). A significant part of the entire Greenland population 

is found within the assessment area (Boertmann et al. 2004). 

The cormorant population in Greenland is probably isolated from other 

populations. It has a favourable conservation status, and it is listed as Least 

Concern (LC) on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

The population has a relatively low sensitivity to oil spills due to the many 

dispersed colonies and a high recovery potential. Furthermore, cormorants 

spend relatively little time on the sea surface, as they do not rest on the water 

like other seabirds. This has to do with their plumage not being ‘waterproof’. 

Mallard, Anas platyrhynchos 

The mallard breeds mainly in freshwater habitats, but also at sheltered marine 

shores. However, in winter the mallards are dependent on the marine 

environment. They assemble in shallow coasts and where they would be 

very sensitive to oil spills. 

The conservation status is favourable and the species is listed as Least Concern 

(LC) on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). The Greenland population 

constitutes a distinct and endemic subspecies. 

Although sensitive to oil spills, the Greenland mallard population would 

probably recover quickly from increased mortality. This appears to be the 

case when the mallard population occasionally suffers from high winter 

mortality due to harsh winters. 

101

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

Mean density 

N/km2 

0 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

102 

60°W 

60°W 

Mean density 

N/km2 

0 - 0.2 

0.3 - 0.5 

0.6 - 1 

1.1 - 2 

2.1 - 3.5 

3.6 - 7.3 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

Spring 

50°W 

50°W 

Autumn 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

Mean density 

60°W 

62°N N/km2 

0 - 0.3 

0.4 - 0.5 

0.6 - 1 

1.1 - 1.5 

1.6 - 3 

3.1 - 5 

5.1 - 10 

10.1 - 20 

20.1 - 45 

45.1 - 91.3 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

Mean density 

N/km2 

0 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

Summer 

50°W 

50°W 

Winter 

Figure 4.7.5. At-sea distribution of great shearwater in the assessment area during spring (Apr-May), summer (Jun-Aug), autumn 

(Sep-Dec) and winter (Jan-Mar) based on available ship survey and aerial survey data collected in 1988 - 2010. Note that 

survey coverage and density scale varies between seasons. 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

Common eider, Somateria mollissima 

This duck is closely associated with the marine environment. It breeds both 

dispersed and in colonies on low islands and feeds in shallow coastal waters 

throughout the assessment area (Fig. 4.7.1). 

Males assemble in moulting concentrations in remote fjords and archipelagos 

when the females have brooded the eggs for some time. Females (failed 

breeders) follow the males somewhat later and most birds moult within 100 

km from the breeding site (Mosbech et al. 2006b). The flight feathers are 

moulted simultaneously, which means that the birds become flightless for 

about three weeks. After moulting the eiders migrate to wintering areas in 

the open water region of Southwest Greenland (Lyngs 2003, Mosbech et al. 

2007). 

Total number of breeding birds in the assessment area is unknown, but 

numbers probably amount to some thousand pairs (L. M. Rasmussen, pers. 

comm.). The population declined considerably during the 1900s due to nonsustainable 

harvest (Gilliland et al. 2009). But recently, after hunting in the 

spring was prohibited, population recovery has been evident in the district 

of Ilulissat and Upernavik, where active management and monitoring using 

local stakeholders has been applied. An annual population increase of ∼15% 

has recently been estimated for these breeding areas (Merkel 2008, 2010a). 

Recent surveys in the central part of the assessment area indicated a similar 

population increase (Rasmussen 2010, 2011). 

The common eider population in West Greenland until recently had an unfavourable 

conservation status due to the decline. It was therefore listed as 

‘Vulnerable’ (VU) on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). However, 

this status now seems out-dated. 

Breeding colonies, moulting areas and staging areas during migration and 

wintering are sensitive, as large number of birds may stay on the water in 

such areas. Especially during winter, the density of common eiders is high 

in the coastal zone of the assessment area (Fig. 4.7.6), as large numbers of 

breeding birds from Northwest Greenland and eastern Canada spend the 

winter in Southwest Greenland (Lyngs 2003, Mosbech et al. 2006b). In 1999 

the winter population of common eiders was estimated to 460,000 birds in 

Southwest Greenland, of which a large proportion occurred within the assessment 

area (Merkel et al. 2002). Presumably the winter population has increased 

considerably since then. Particularly the fjords and bays around 

Nuuk are important wintering areas (Merkel et al. 2002, Blicher et al. 2011). 

103

66°N 

64°N 

Mean density 

62°N 

N/km2 

0 

1 - 5 

6 - 10 

11 - 20 

21 - 35 

36 - 75 

76 - 150 

151 - 300 

301 - 640 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

104 

60°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

Spring 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

Mean density 

60°W 

62°N 

N/km2 

0 

1 - 10 

11 - 30 

31 - 60 

61 - 125 

126 - 250 

251 - 500 

501 - 1.000 

1,001 - 2,244 


0 50 100 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

Figures 4.7.6. At-sea distribution of common eider in the assessment area based on available ship survey and aerial survey 

data from 1988 - 2010. Only the coastal zone is well covered and only during winter (Merkel et al. 2002). Note also that the 

density scale varies between seasons. 

King eider, Somateria spectabilis 

The king eider is mainly a winter visitor to the assessment area, although a 

few may occur also in summer. The birds arrive from breeding grounds in 

Canada and moulting grounds in NW Greenland during October. The most 

important winter area is the Store Hellefiskebanke just north of the assessment 

area (Fig. 4.7.7). But wintering king eiders are also found along the 

coasts and on some of the offshore banks of the assessment area, especially 

Fyllas Bank. In winters with heavy ice conditions birds are forced to leave 

Store Hellefiskebanke and seek alternative winter habitats within the assessment 

area. An aerial survey in March 1999 (Merkel et al. 2002) resulted 

in an estimate of 153,000 king eiders in Southwest Greenland, of which a 

large proportion occurred in the assessment area (Merkel et al. 2002). Satellite 

tracking of king eiders confirms that a part of the population use the assessment 

area in winter (Fig. 4.7.8) (Mosbech et al. 2006a). 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

Winter 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

Figures 4.7.7. At-sea distribution of king eider in the assessment area during spring (Apr-May), summer (Jun-Aug), autumn 

(Sep-Dec) and winter (Jan-Mar) based on available ship survey and aerial survey data collected in 1988 - 2010. Note that survey 


105

Figure 4.7.8. King eider satellite 

tracking locations from year 

round tracking of birds implanted 

at moulting localities in Umiarfik 

and the fjords at the west coast of 

Disko and at a breeding locality in 

Arctic Canada outside the map. 

The scattered dots in the central 

Baffin Bay and on Baffin Island 

are from bird migrating to and 

from breeding localities in Arctic 

Canada west of the map border. 

Observations from two ship 

based surveys are also indicated 

on the map. The importance of 

the waters west of Disko Island, 

Store Hellefiskebanke (at c. 68° 

N) and Fyllas Banke (at c. 64° N) 

is apparent. Based on AU/GINR 

data and Mosbech et al. (2006a). 

106 

King eiders have been recorded in very large flocks (>30.000 indvs.) in leads 

in the drift ice and such concentrations are very sensitive to oil spills, as a 

large fraction of the entire population may be exposed to oil. 

The king eider is listed as Least Concern (LC) on the Greenland Red list 

(Boertmann 2007). However, this applies to the breeding population in Arctic 

Canada, which are the birds that moult and winter in West Greenland. 

The global status of the king eider is also Least Concern (LC) (IUCN 2010). 

Long-tailed Duck, Clangula hyemalis 

This duck breeds scattered along sheltered coasts, and there are no major 

concentrations of moulting birds known from the assessment area. But in 

winter the ducks, at least from Iceland and Northeast Greenland, winter in 

the assessment area together with local birds (Lyngs 2003, A. Mosbech 

unpubl.). A survey in March 1999 resulted in an estimate of 94,000 wintering

Figure 4.7.9. Distribution and 

inter-polated densities of longtailed 

duck in Southwest Greenland 

based on aerial surveys in 

February/March 1999 (Merkel et 

al. 2002). 

long-tailed ducks in Southwest Greenland, distributed mainly south of 

Nuuk (Fig. 4.7.9). A high density area was located in the coastal zone west of 

Nuuk where 13,000 birds were present (Merkel et al. 2002). 

Wintering long-tailed ducks are sensitive to oil spills and in high density areas, 

as in the case west of Nuuk, many birds may be exposed. 

The long-tailed duck is listed as Least Concern on the Greenland red List 

(Boertmann 2007). 

Store 

Hellefiske 

banke 

Lille 

Hellefiske 

banke 

54 W 

Fyllas banke 

Aasiat 

Sisimiut 

Long tailed duck 

Birds/sq. km 

0 

0.1 - 10 

10 - 100 

100 - 500 

Maniitsoq 

Nuuk coastal area 

50 m isobath 

Kangaatsiaq 

Line of seperation between 

coastal stratum 1 (north) 

and 2 (south) 

Nuuk 

Paamiut 

48 W 

0 50 100 150 200 Km 

Ivittuut 

Narsaq 

Qaqortoq 

42 W 

Nanortalik 

68 N 

66 N 

64 N 

62 N 

60 N 

107

Figure 4.7.10. The density of 

moulting harlequin ducks recorded 

in July 1999 expressed as the 

number of birds recorded per km 

surveyed coastline (Boertmann & 

Mosbech 2002). The moulting 

period is July to September. 

108 

Harlequin duck, Histrionicus histrionicus 

The harlequin duck breeds at inland rivers. However, they also occur in 

marine habitats: non-breeding individuals and post-breeding males assemble 

from July at exposed rocky coasts and skerries and in winter all birds are 

found in these extreme habitats. A few non-breeding birds may stay at these 

coasts also before the moulting period. 

The breeding population in Greenland is low, numbering probably only a 

few thousand pairs. However, Canadian birds also use the Greenland coasts 

for moulting and wintering (Robert et al. 2008) explaining why the number 

of birds along the outer coast – estimated at 5,000-10,000 birds – is higher 

than the Greenland population can muster (Boertmann 2008a, Robert et al. 

2008). 

In July 1999 the population of moulting birds was surveyed from aircraft 

(Fig. 4.7.10) and the resulting estimate was 5,000-10,000 males (Boertmann & 

Mosbech 2002, Boertmann 2003, 2008a). The winter population has not been 

surveyed, but is estimated at roughly more than 10,000 birds (Boertmann et 

al. 2006). 

The moulting and wintering birds are very sensitive to marine oil spills due 

to their preference for exposed habitats along the outer coastline (Fig. 

4.7.10). The highest concentrations of moulting birds within the assessment 

area was in 1999 found just south of Nuuk, while the distribution of the 

wintering birds is not known (Boertmann & Mosbech 2002, Boertmann 

2003). 

Due to the small breeding population, harlequin duck is listed as Near 

Threatened (NT) on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

Red-breasted merganser, Mergus serrator 

This is a breeding bird in fjords and on sheltered coasts. Especially moulting 

birds assemble in high concentrations in some fjords, where they are sensitive 

to potential oil spills (Boertmann & Mosbech 2001). However, the 

known moulting sites are far from the outer coast where it is unlikely that 

oil spills from Davis Strait can reach. Winter concentrations may also be 

sensitive, but no knowledge on this is at hand. 

The red-breasted merganser is listed as Least Concern (LC) on the Greenland 

Red List (Boertmann 2007). The population is probably isolated from 

neighbouring populations in Iceland and Canada. 

Black-legged kittiwake, Rissa tridactyla 

This small gull is a numerous breeder in the assessment area, with the breeding 

colonies centred in Maniitsoq district (Fig. 4.7.2). The most recent survey 

of the breeding population in Greenland lists 35 occupied colonies holding 

approximately 34,000 breeding pairs (Labansen et al. 2010) within the assessment 

area. The breeding colonies are usually found in the fjords, and the 

birds often forage in the open sea, performing daily migrations in and out of 

the fjord. Breeding birds arrive to the colonies in the period March to May 

and leave again during August when the chicks are fledged.

Figure 4.7.11. At-sea distribution of black-legged kittiwake in the assessment area during spring (Apr-May), summer (Jun-Aug), 

autumn (Sep-Dec) and winter (Jan-Mar) based on available ship survey and aerial survey data collected in 1988 - 2010. Note 

that survey coverage and density scale varies between seasons. 

109

110 

Kittiwakes are abundant in the shelf waters of the assessment area (Fig. 

4.7.11) and many of these are non-breeding birds from populations breeding 

elsewhere in the North Atlantic (Lyngs 2003). Kittiwakes spend the winter in 

offshore parts of the North Atlantic, and at least some occur in the Davis 

Strait, but very few were observed during the winter surveys in 1999 

(Merkel et al. 2002). 

Kittiwakes are most vulnerable to oil spills at breeding colonies where large 

numbers of birds often assemble on the sea surface. There may also be concentrations 

at feeding areas, e.g. in the marginal ice in spring and early 

summer or at upwelling sites, but these are not predictable in time and 

space. 

Due to a substantial decrease in the breeding population (Labansen et al. 

2010), the kittiwake is listed as Vulnerable (VU) on the Greenland Red List 


Ivory gull, Pagophila eburnea 

Ivory gulls breeding in the northeast sector of the Arctic Atlantic (Northeast 

Greenland, Svalbard and the Russian Arctic) move south in autumn in the 

drift ice off East Greenland to winter quarters mainly in the marginal ice 

zone in the Labrador Sea and the Davis Strait, where they arrive in December 

(Orr & Parsons 1982, Gilg et al. 2010). This probably means that a large 

proportion of the northeast Atlantic population of the ivory gull moves 

through the assessment area in early December (Gilg et al. 2009, Gilg et al. 

2010). In years when the drift ice in winter moves into the assessment area 

from the west, ivory gulls will be present, but the fraction of the population 

is unknown. In spring, most of the gulls probably move the same way back 

through the assessment area; although it has been shown that they can migrate 

northwards in the Davis Strait and across the Greenland Ice Sheet to 

North East Greenland (O. Gilg pers. comm.). Observations from 2011 show 

that adult ivory gulls are present in Julianehåb Bugt as early as late-October 

(D. Boertmann, unpubl. data), a fact not revealed by the satellite-tracked 

birds. Ivory gulls can probably therefore also be present in the assessment 

area around this time or slightly later. 

The ivory gull is of high conservation concern (Gilg et al. 2009, Gilg et al. 

2010), being listed as near threatened (NT) on the international Red List 

(IUCN 2011), as vulnerable (VU) on both the Greenland and the Svalbard 

red lists (Boertmann 2007, Kålås et al. 2010), and as endangered by the 

Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC). 

Iceland gull, Larus glaucoides 

This gull is the most abundant of the large gulls in the assessment area. Numerous 

breeding colonies are found there, on steep cliffs and small islands 

(Fig. 4.7.2). 

The assessment area is also an important winter habitat for this gull, and 

both local breeding birds and birds from northern areas assemble here 

(Lyngs 2003, Boertmann et al. 2006). 

Iceland gulls are most sensitive to oil spills at the breeding colonies. These 

colonies, however, are generally small and the population is spread widely 

along the coasts and population sensitivity is therefore relatively low compared 

to other much more concentrated seabirds.

The Iceland gull has a favourable conservation status in Greenland and is 

listed as Least Concern on the Greenland Red list (Boertmann 2007). The 

Greenland population constitutes a distinct and endemic subspecies. 

Glaucous gull, Larus hyperboreus 

This gull is widespread in the region, but generally not as numerous as the 

Iceland gull (Fig. 4.7.2). It breeds in colonies often together with other colonial 

seabirds and both on steep cliffs and on low islands. 

In winter, glaucous gulls are numerous along the coasts of the open water 

region, as birds from Svalbard and possibly also Canada assemble here 

(Lyngs 2003, Boertmann et al. 2004). 

Glaucous gulls are most sensitive to oil spills at the breeding colonies. These 

colonies, however, are generally small and the population is spread widely 

along the coasts and therefore population sensitivity is relatively low compared 

to other much more concentrated seabirds. 

The glaucous gull has a favourable conservation status in Greenland, and is 

listed as Least Concern on the Greenland Red list (Boertmann 2007). 

Great black-backed gull, Larus marinus 

This gull is common and widespread along the coasts of the assessment area 

(Fig. 4.7.2). It breeds both in colonies and as dispersed as pairs – usually on 

small islands. 

In winter, the entire population of Greenland great black-backed gull is 

found along the coasts of the open water area in Southwest Greenland. 

The conservation status is favourable and the population is probably increasing, 

at least it has extended the range northwards in recent decades. It 

is listed as Least concern (LC) on the Greenland red list (Boertmann 2007). 

Lesser black-backed gull, Larus fuscus 

The lesser black-backed gull has immigrated to Greenland within the past 30 

years (Boertmann 2008b) and it is now a relatively common breeder in the 

assessment area (Fig. 4.7.2). It is usually found in small colonies among other 

gull species on small islands. The lesser black-backed gulls are migratory, 

leaving Greenland for the winter. 

This species in not assessed on the Greenland Red List, but as it is increasing, 

both in range and number, its conservation status is favourable. 

Arctic tern, Sterna paradisaea 

Relatively few breeding colonies of Arctic tern are present in the assessment 

area, compared with on more northern coasts of West Greenland, and long 

extents of coastline are completely without breeding terns (Fig. 4.7.2). 

Arctic terns are highly migratory, wintering in the southern hemisphere 

(Egevang et al. 2010). They arrive to the breeding colonies during 

May/early-June and leave again during August/September. They spend 

most of the time in coastal waters close to breeding colonies. Terns feed on 

fish and crustaceans by plunge diving, and they usually do not rest on the 

water surface, making them less exposed than other seabirds to marine oil 

spills. 

111

112 

The West Greenland Arctic tern population had at least until 2001 an unfavourable 

conservation status and was decreasing due to excessive egg collecting. 

This activity was banned in 2001. It was therefore listed as Near 

Threatened (NT) on the national Greenland Red List, a listing which may be 

outdated now (Boertmann 2007). 

Black guillemot, Cepphus grylle 

This auk is the most widespread of the breeding colonial seabirds in the assessment 

area (Boertmann et al. 1996). There are colonies in most fjords, bays 

and coasts, and their numbers range from a few pairs to several hundreds 

(Fig. 4.7.1). The total breeding population within the assessment area is unknown, 

but numbers at least several thousand pairs. During the breeding 

time they primarily stay in coastal waters, but in winter they disperse over 

the shelf and are often found in waters with drift ice (Mosbech & Johnson 

1999). 

Black guillemots are more or less migratory and birds from further north in 

Greenland move to the assessment area for the winter. During an aerial survey 

in 1999 a total of 12,000 black guillemots were estimated in the coastal 

zone between the southern tip of Greenland and Disko Bay (Fig. 4.7.12) 

(Merkel et al. 2002). 

The black guillemot population in Greenland has a favourable conservation 

status and is listed as Least Concern (LC) on the Greenland Red List 


Vulnerable concentrations occur mainly in the summer time near the breeding 

colonies. However, due to the wide dispersion of the colonies black guillemot 

sensitivity on a population level is relatively low. 

Thick-billed murre, Uria lomvia 

This auk is a relatively numerous breeder in the assessment area. However, 

the breeding sites are few and very localised: One colony in Nuuk and three 

in Maniitsoq (Fig. 4.7.1). The most recent surveys sum up to 15,100 indviduals 

present in the breeding colonies within the assessment area (GINR & AU 

unpubl. data).


interpolated densities of black 

guillemot in Southwest Greenland 

based on aerial surveys in February/March 

1999 (Merkel et al. 

2002). 

Store 

Hellefiske 

banke 

Lille 

Hellefiske 

banke 

54 W 

Fyllas banke 

Black guillemot Birds/ sq. km 

0 

0.1 - 10 

Aasiat 

Sisimiut 

10 - 100 100 - 300 

50 m isobath 

Maniitsoq 

Kangaatsiaq 

Nuuk 

Paamiut 

In winter thick-billed murres from all over the North Atlantic congregate in 

the open water area and the population then is assessed at >1.5 million birds 

(Merkel et al. 2002, Boertmann et al. 2006), making it the most numerous 

seabird in the assessment area during winter (Fig. 4.7.13), except for the little 

auks, which potentially may occur in higher numbers. 

48 W 

0 50 100 150 200 Km 

Ivittuut 

Narsaq 

Qaqortoq 

42 W 

Nanortalik 

68 N 

66 N 

64 N 

62 N 

60 N 

113

Figure 4.7.13. At-sea distribution of thick-billed murre in the assessment area during spring (Apr-May), summer (Jun-Aug), autumn 

(Sep-Dec) and winter (Jan-Mar) based on available ship survey and aerial survey data collected in 1988 - 2010. Note that 

survey coverage and density scale varies between seasons. 

114

Murres spend very long time on the sea surface and only come on land in 

the breeding season. When the chicks are approximately three weeks old 

and far from fully grown or able to fly, they leave the colony in company 

with the adult male and swim/drift to offshore waters. The male then sheds 

all flight feathers and becomes flightless for some weeks and starts migration 

southwards by swimming. This swimming migration goes through the 

assessment area in late summer and early autumn (Fig. 4.7.13). 

The West Greenland murre population has an unfavourable conservation 

status because it is decreasing. This decline is mainly ascribed to nonsustainable 

harvest and more recently perhaps also chronic oil spills caused 

by trans-Atlantic shipping in the winter quarters in Newfoundland waters 

(Falk & Kampp 1997, Wiese et al. 2004). 

Murres are very sensitive both to oil spills and disturbance at the breeding 

colonies, where large proportions of the total population can be impacted by 

a single incident. Vulnerable offshore concentrations occur at feeding 

grounds, but they are highly vulnerable especially during the period of 

flightlessness and swimming migration. 

Due to the population decline the thick-billed murre is listed as Vulnerable 

(VU) on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

Common murre, Uria aalge 

The common murre is only found breeding at one site in the assessment area 

(Boertmann et al. 1996), in the colony of thick-billed murres southwest of 

Nuuk. The highest number recorded there in recent years is approximately 

75 birds. 

The species is listed as endangered on the Greenland Red List, as the population 

in other colonies to the south of the assessment area has decreased 


Razorbill, Alca torda 

The razorbill is a widespread breeding bird in the assessment area. Several 

colonies holding from five to 300 individuals are found both in the fjords 

and at the outer coasts. The main part is found in Maniitsoq district (Fig. 

4.7.1). 

Razorbills are migratory and recent studies indicated that Greenland razorbills 

move to the waters off eastern North America for the winter (AU, unpubl.). 

Razorbills’ behaviour and sensitivity towards oil spills are similar to murres 

and black guillemots. However, the breeding population is much more dispersed 

than the thick-billed murres, with numerous small colonies along the 

coasts, so razorbills are likely to display better recovery potential. The conservation 

status of the razorbill in Greenland is favourable, and it is listed as 

Least Concern on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

Atlantic puffin, Fratercula arctica 

The breeding population of puffins in the assessment area is concentrated at 

the mouth of Godhåbsfjord. Here approximately eight colonies hold about 

1,000 birds. There are a few more small colonies within the assessment area, 

both north and south of Nuuk. 

115

Figure 4.7.14. At-sea distribution of puffin in the assessment area during spring (Apr-May), summer (Jun-Aug), autumn (Sep- 

Dec) and winter (Jan-Mar) based on available ship survey and aerial survey data collected in 1988 - 2010. Note that survey 


116

The puffins are migratory, but their whereabouts in winter are unknown, 

although recoveries of ringed birds indicate the waters off Northeast Canada 

(Lyngs 2003). In the autumn high numbers of puffins have been recorded in 

offshore waters of the southern part of the assessment area (Fig. 4.7.14) and 

these birds are probably birds from breeding colonies outside Greenland 

(Iceland, Norway) (Boertmann in press). 

Several colonies further north in West Greenland have decreased and the 

Greenland puffin population was therefore assessed as Near Threatened 

(NT) on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

Puffins are highly sensitive to oil spills both on individual level and on population 

level (Boertmann et al. 1996, Boertmann in press) and they are most 

vulnerable at the colonies where high numbers can be assembled on the water. 

Little auk, Alle alle 

This is the smallest of the auks, but the most numerous of the seabirds in the 

North Atlantic. It does not breed within the assessment area, but is a numerous 

autumn/winter visitor (Fig. 4.7.15). However, the species is difficult to 

survey due to the size and the knowledge on winter abundance distribution 

is therefore inadequate (Boertmann et al. 2004). 

Little auks are very sensitive to oil spills and large winter concentrations 

may suffer from high mortality if hit by oil spills. 

The Greenland population is assessed as Least Concern (LC) on the national 

Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

White-tailed eagle, Haliaeetus albicilla 

The white-tailed eagle is a resident species along the coasts of the assessment 

area (Fig. 4.7.16). Pairs breed scattered in archipelagoes and fjords and the 

total Greenland breeding population in 1990 was estimated at 150-170 pairs 

(Kampp & Wille 1990). The population today is probably of the same size, 

but information is lacking. 

Although not a seabird, white-tailed eagles take their food from the marine 

environment, mainly fish and birds, and may become exposed to oil spill by 

contact with the water and from ingesting contaminated food. Several bald 

eagles (a close relative to the white-tailed eagle) were killed (estimated approximately 

250) by the oil after the spill in Prince Williams Sound in 1989 

and the population here recovered within 6 years (Bowman et al. 1997). 

However the density of eagles in Prince William Sound is much higher than 

in West Greenland, indicating that a recovery from oil induced mortality in 

Greenland would be much slower, and that the eagle population is more 

vulnerable. 

Due to the small population the white-tailed eagle is listed as Vulnerable 

(VU) on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). The population is isolated 

from other populations and thereby particularly sensitive to increased 

mortality. 

117

Figure 4.7.15. At-sea distribution of little auk in the assessment area during spring (Apr-May), summer (Jun-Aug), autumn (Sep- 

Dec) and winter (Jan-Mar) based on available ship survey and aerial survey data collected in 1988 - 2010. Note that survey 


118

Figure 4.7.16. Density of whitetailed 

sea eagle territories within 

a 15x15 km 2 grid around Nuuk 

and northwards (Johansen et al. 

2008). A similar or even higher 

density of territories is found 

south of this map along the 

coasts of the southern part of the 

assessment area. 

67°N 

66°N 

65°N 

64°N 

54°W 

4.8 Marine mammals 

4.8.1 Polar bear and walrus 

Erik W. Born (GINR) 

54°W 

No. of territories 

1 

2 

3 

0 20 40 60 80 Km 

Polar bear, Ursus maritimus 

Distribution: Based on the recapture or harvest of previously tagged animals 

and studies of movement of adult female polar bears with satellite collars, 

the Davis Strait (DS) subpopulation of polar bear occurs south of 66° N in 

the Labrador Sea, eastern Hudson Strait and in the sea ice covered areas of 

Davis Strait south of Cape Dyer on East Baffin Island and the entrance to 

Kangerlussuaq/Søndre Strømfjord in West Greenland (Obbard et al. 2010 

and references therein). 

52°W 

52°W 

50°W 

50°W 

67°N 

66°N 

65°N 

64°N 

119

70°N 

60°N 

50°N 

75°W 

120 

120°W 

105°W 

90°W 75°W 60°W 45°W 30°W 

60°W 

15°W 

0° 

Deployment sites 

Baffin Bay sub-pop. 

45°W 

70°N 

60°N 

Lancaster Sound sub-pop. 

Kane Basin sub-pop. 

Davis Strait sub-pop. 


0 250 500 Km 

50°N 

70°N 

60°N 

50°N 

75°W 

120°W 

90°W 75°W 60°W 45°W 30°W 

A genetic study of polar bears (Paetkau et al. 1999) indicated significant differences 

between bears from the Davis Strait and neighbouring Baffin Bay. 

The Davis Strait subpopulation of polar bears range in the ‘seasonal-ice’ 

ecoregion (Amstrup et al. 2007, 2008), with the ice-free period extending 

from approximately August through November. Annual ice cover in Davis 

Strait is highly variable and ice breakup has become earlier since 1991 

(Stirling & Parkinson 2006). 

Satellite telemetry conducted in the period 1991-2001 showed that polar 

bears from the DS subpopulation range the offshore pack ice in the Davis 

Strait (Mosbech et al. 2007). The movement of the bears instrumented with 

satellite-radios indicated an overall tendency to occur on the fast ice and in 

the shear zone between fast ice and pack ice along eastern Baffin Island. 

However, in December-June there is an overlap between the distribution of 

some polar bears from the Davis Strait subpopulation and the assessment 

area. 

The extent of the pack ice in the Davis Strait varies from year to year (see 

chapter 3). So does the position of the Davis Strait whelping patch of hooded 

seals, Cystophora cristata (Bowen et al. 1987). During the period 1974-1984, 

the location of this whelping patch where polar bears occur (F.O. Kapel, per- 

105°W 

60°W 

15°W 

0° 

Movement, all year 

Davis Strait sub-pop. 

Baffin Bay sub-pop. 

45°W 

70°N 

60°N 

Lancaster Sound sub-pop. 

Kane Basin sub-pop. 


0 250 500 Km 

Figure 4.8.1. Left: Locations where adult female polar bears were instrumented with satellite transmitters (1991-1995) given by 

sub-population (Davis Strait, Baffin Bay, Lancaster Sound and Kane Basin). A total of 29 bears were instrumented in the Davis 

Strait subpopulation (blue) and their movements tracked during 1991-2001. The identification and delineation of the various subpopulations 

based on hierarchal cluster analyses is described in Taylor et al. (2001). Unpublished data: Nunavut Wildlife Management 

Division, University of Saskatchewan, Canadian Wildlife Service, Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. 

Right: Track lines showing the overall movement during 1991-2001 of polar bears instrumented with satellite transmitters in the 

Davis Strait-Baffin region and adjacent areas. A certain degree of overlap between the different sub-populations is apparent. 

Unpublished data: Nunavut Wildlife Management Division, University of Saskatchewan, Canadian Wildlife Service, Greenland 

Institute of Natural Resources. 

50°N

sonal communication 1984) varied within an area confined by approx. 55° 

45'W – approx. 60° W and approx. 61° 50' N – approx. 63° 15' N (Bowen et 

al. 1987: 286). It is likely that the number of polar bears occurring at the Davis 

Strait hooded seal whelping patch during spring also varies from year to 

year, depending among other factors on ice conditions in the Davis Strait 

and the ability of the bears to reach the whelping patch from eastern Baffin 

Island. 

In recent years unusual occurrence of concentrations of harp seals (Pagophilus 

groenlandicus) at the eastern edge of the Davis Strait pack ice has been reported. 

In late January-early February large numbers of harp seals were observed 

in the pack ice west of the town of Sisimiut (approx. 67° N) (Rosing- 

Asvid 2008). Hence, variation in the distribution of prey including concentrations 

of harp seals may also influence the spatial distribution and number 

of polar bears within the assessment area. 

Number: The most recent inventory of the Davis Strait subpopulation was 

completed in 2007 resulting in an estimate is 2,142 polar bears (95% lognormal 

CI 1811 – 2534) (Obbard et al. 2010). 

Amstrup et al. (2007, 2008) incorporated projections of future sea ice in four 

different ‘ecoregions’ of the Arctic, based on ten general circulation models 

by the International Climate Change Panel (ICCP), into two models of polar 

bear habitat and potential population response. One eco-region encompasses 

the polar bear habitat with seasonal ice (‘the seasonal ice ecoregion’) – including 

the Davis Strait – where sea ice usually is absent during the open 

water period. One of the models (a deterministic ’carrying capacity model’) 

predicted a 7-10% decrease in the polar bear population in the ‘seasonal ice 

ecoregion’ approx. 45 years from now (22-32% decline approx. 100 years 

from now), whereas the other model (quasi-quantitative ‘Bayesian network 

population stressor model’) predicted extirpation of polar bears in this 

ecoregion – including the Davis Strait – by the mid-2100s. 

Conclusions: Polar bears from the Davis Strait subpopulation occur within 

the assessment area during periods with sea ice. Satellite telemetry data 

from the 1990s indicate that polar bears may occur in the assessment area 

from November-December until sometime in spring (May-June), depending 

on annual variability in sea ice cover. It is likely that the distribution and 

number of polar bears from the Davis Strait subpopulation that occur at the 

eastern edge of the Davis Strait pack ice to a certain extent are influenced by 

the location of the Davis Strait hooded seal whelping patch and unusual occurrence 

of harp seal concentrations. 

Walrus, Odobenus rosmarus 

General biology: The following life history traits are relevant to evaluation of 

the potential effects on walruses from oil-related activities. An important 

characteristic of walruses is that they are gregarious year round (Fay 1982, 

1985), which means that impacts will concern groups rather than single individuals 

(Wiig et al. 1996). Walruses are benthic feeders that usually forage 

where water depths are less than approximately 100 m (Vibe 1950, Fay 1982, 

Born et al. 2003); although they occasionally make dives to at least 200–250+ 

m depth, both inshore and offshore (Born et al. 2005, Acquarone et al. 2006). 

They have an affinity to shallow water areas with suitable benthic food and 

winter in areas without solid ice - i.e. where there is not 100% sea ice cover 

(Born et al. 1995 and references therein). In western Greenland such habitat 

121

122 

is mainly found between approx. 66° 30' N and approx. 70° 30' N and between 

the coast and approx. 56° W (Born et al. 1994, Born et al. 1995). 

During the mating season (January–April; Born 2001, Born 2003 and 

references therein) male walruses engage in ritualised visual and acoustical 

display underwater (Fay et al. 1984, Sjare & Stirling 1996, Sjare et al. 2003). 

Delineation of population: Genetic analyses indicate that three subpopulations 

exist in the Baffin Bay-Davis Strait region (Cronin et al. 1994, Andersen et al. 

1998, Andersen & Born 2000, Born et al. 2001, Andersen et al. 2009a, 

Andersen et al. 2009b, NAMMCO 2009): The (1) Eastern Hudson Bay- 

Hudson Strait, (2) West Greenland-Southeast Baffin Island, and (3) and the 

northern Baffin Bay stock confined to the North Water Polynya. The studies 

indicated that (1) walruses in the West Greenland-Southeast Baffin Island 

and the Baffin Bay populations differ genetically with some likely limited 

male mediated gene flow between these populations, (2) walruses at Southeast 

Baffin Island and West Greenland do not differ genetically, (3) walruses 

from Hudson Strait have some genetic input to this West Greenland- 

Southeast Baffin Island stock. 

A satellite telemetry study during 2005-2008 supported the findings of the 

genetic studies that walruses in West Greenland and at southeastern Baffin 

Island constitute the same population, and this population is hunted in both 

Greenland and Nunavut (NAMMCO 2009, Dietz et al. 2010). 

Distribution: From October–November until late-May (timing varying from 

year to year depending on sea ice conditions) walruses from the West Greenland-Southeast 

Baffin Island stock (NAMMCO 2009) are found in the pack 

ice approximately 30 to 100 km off the coast between approx. 65° 30' N and 

approx. 68° 15' N. The main distribution in this region is north of approx. 66° 

30’ N; although direct observations, satellite tracking and catch reports indicate 

that walruses do occur inside the northern part of the assessment area 

(Born et al. 1994, GINR/NERI unpubl. data). 

Several systematic aerial surveys conducted during 1981–2008 (Born et al. 

1994 and references therein, Mosbech et al. 2007, NAMMCO 2009, Heide- 

Jørgensen et al. 2010a) showed that winter distribution of walruses off Central 

West Greenland is similar to that indicated by historical information, 

with two main concentrations; the shallow water banks between approx. 66° 

30' N and approx. 68° 15' N, and the banks along the western coast of Disko 

Island between approx. 69º 15' and approx. 70º 30' N (Ibid.). 

On their West Greenland wintering grounds walruses prefer areas with 

dense pack ice (usually more than 60% ice cover) in

Numbers: The status of the walrus subpopulation in Greenland and the eastern 

Canadian Arctic was evaluated by the North Atlantic Marine Mammal 

Commission in 2009 (NAMMCO 2009). The 2006 and 2008 aerial surveys 

that were dedicated to estimating the abundance of walruses on their Central 

West Greenland wintering grounds resulted in weighted averages of fully 

corrected estimates of abundance. The estimate of abundance for the 

southern wintering ground (i.e. between approx. 65° 30' N and 68° 15' N and 

between the Greenland coast and approx. 56° W) was approx. 2,400 in 2006 

and approx. 2,900 walruses in 2008 (Table 5 in Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2010a). 

In 2005, 2006, 2007 and 2008 aerial surveys were conducted jointly by Department 

of Fisheries (DFO, Canada) and the Greenland Institute of Natural 

Resources (GINR, Greenland) during the ‘open water’ or ice free season over 

the walrus summering grounds along Southeast Baffin Island between 62° 

10' N and 69° 37' N. In 2007, a boat survey was conducted by DFO, GINR 

and NERI along the coast of Southeast Baffin Island where walruses from 

the West Greenland-Southeast Baffin Island stock haul out on land during 

summer. The purpose was to arrive at an estimate of ‘minimum number of 

walruses alive’ in these areas. The highest number recorded was 1,056 walruses 

obtained on 3-4 September 2007 (NAMMCO 2009). This number has 

not been adjusted for animals at sea and not present on or at the haul-outs 

during the survey. Studies of walrus behaviour in other parts of the Arctic 

indicate that walruses spend an average of approx. 25% to approx. 40% of 

their time on land (cf. Born 2005). This indicates that several thousand walruses 

from the West Greenland-Southeast Baffin Island stock can be found 

during summer along southeastern Baffin Island. 

Movements: Scattered observations offshore in Davis Strait in March–July 

suggest that walruses migrate across Davis Strait from western Greenland to 

eastern Baffin Island during spring (Fig. 4.8.2) (Born et al. 1982, Born et al. 

1994). Satellite telemetry during spring of 2005–2008 supports the notion that 

the majority of walruses that winter in Central West Greenland move west 

to summer at southeastern Baffin Island (NAMMCO 2009, Dietz et al. 2010). 

123

Figure 4.8.2. Track lines and 

Kernel Home Range polygons 

from 31 walruses instrumented 

with satellite- linked transmitters 

at Store Hellefiskebanke during 

March-April 2005-2008 and at 

Southeast Baffin Island during 

August-September 2008 (Dietz et 

al. 2010). 

124 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

Walrus 

65°W 

Haul-out sites 

62°N 

St. Hellefiskebanke (

tively impacted by disturbance from ship traffic and oil spills (Wiig et al. 

1996). 

During haul out walruses are particularly sensitive to disturbance, including 

sailing, traffic on land, and flying (Born et al. 1995 and references therein). 

This was for example documented by Born & Knutsen (1990) who, based on 

fieldwork in Northeast Greenland, concluded that air traffic should not go 

closer than 5 km to haul out sites. This minimum distance could be tentatively 

applied to walruses on ice. 

The effect of oil spills on walruses has not been studied in the field. However, 

Born et al. (1995) and Wiig et al. (1996) speculated that if walruses do not 

avoid oil on the water they may suffer if their habitats are affected by oil and 

that they, like other marine mammals, can be harmed by both short-term 

and long-term exposure. Born et al. (1995) pointed to the fact that some features 

in the ecology of walruses make them more vulnerable to the harmful 

effects of spilled oil than many other marine mammals: 

• Due to the high level of gregariousness in walruses, an oil spill that affects 

one would be likely to affect at least several individuals. 

• Their pronounced thigmotactic behavior on ice and on land makes it 

likely that oil-fouled walruses will rub oil onto the skin or into the eyes 

of other individuals. 

• Walruses tend to inhabit coastal areas and areas of relatively loose pack 

ice. Spilled oil is likely to accumulate in just such areas (Griffiths et al. 

1987). Walruses therefore have a high risk of being fouled not only in the 

water but also when they haul out. 

• Because they are benthic feeders, walruses may be more likely to ingest 

petroleum hydrocarbons than most other pinnipeds. Benthic invertebrates 

are known to accumulate petroleum hydrocarbons from food, 

sediments and the surrounding water (Richardson et al. 1989). Mortality 

of several species of benthic invertebrate including bivalve mollusks has 

been observed as a direct effect of oil spills (North 1967, Percy & Mullin 

1975, both fide U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service 1993). Furthermore, sublethal 

effects on the behaviour, physiology, and productivity of benthic 

mollusks may result from exposure to petroleum products (Clark & 

Finley 1977). The implications for walruses may be serious since contaminants 

in their food are certain to build up in their own tissue. Also, if oil 

contamination were to reduce the biomass or productivity of the invertebrate 

communities that sustain walruses there would evidently be 

some secondary impact on the walruses themselves. 

• Walruses are stenophagous and depend on access to mollusk banks in 

shallow water. Oil spills in certain feeding areas could force walruses to 

seek alternative food or relocate to other feeding areas. It cannot be assumed 

that alternative types of food or feeding areas are actually available; 

thus, such an oil spill scenario could prove detrimental to the walruses. 

Conclusions: Walruses from the West Greenland-Southeast Baffin Island 

stock may occur between some time in fall until sometime in May (period 

likely to depend to a large extent on ice conditions in any particular year) in 

West Greenland 30 to 100 km off the coast between approx. 65° 30' N and 

approx. 68° 15' N. Main distribution in this region is between approx. 66° 30' 

N and approx. 68° 15' N (i.e. Store Hellefiskebanke). Satellite telemetry 

(2005-2008) and aerial surveys (1981-2008) indicate that only a small fraction 

125

126 

of the walruses wintering in these areas may occur within the assessment area. 

Hence, oil exploration and exploitation activities may potentially only 

impact a minor (but unknown) fraction of walruses of the West Greenland- 

Southeast Baffin Island stock when they occur at their West Greenland wintering 

grounds. 

As walruses mainly occur north of the assessment area, the most likely impact 

of disturbance from oil-exploration inside the northern part of the assessment 

area will therefore likely be the displacement of relatively few individuals 

due to underwater noise and masking. 

However, the currents that are flowing north at greater depths along the 

West Greenland coast through the Davis Strait assessment area may bring 

oil slicks northwards into the important close-by walrus wintering grounds 

at Store Hellefiskebanke and Disko Banke farther north. In case of fouling of 

the sea bed < 200 m depth on Store Hellefiskebanke essential walrus foraging 

areas may be destroyed. In that connection it must be noted that at 

Southeast Baffin Island there are only few and geographically limited open 

water areas suitable for wintering walruses compared to the West Greenland 

‘open water area’ over the Store Hellefiskebanke. Furthermore, the extension 

of shallow water banks along Southeast Baffin Island is much smaller than 

in West Greenland where walruses occur. Hence, although not known with 

certainty, it seems plausible that the majority of the West Greenland- 

Southeast Baffin Island stock of walruses winter at the West Greenland 

banks between approx. 65° 30' N and approx. 68° 15' N. Therefore, any potential 

negative impact from oil exploration or exploitation activity in West 

Greenland would influence this stock comparatively more severely. 

4.8.2 Seals 

Aqqalu Rosing-Asvid (GINR) 

Five species of seals occur in the assessment area; two species (harp and 

hooded seals) are migrant seals and their numbers fluctuate significantly 

with season. Ringed seals maintain breathing holes in annual sea ice 

throughout the winter. Some ringed seals in the assessment area are likely to 

live a relatively stationary existence in the glacier fjords, while others enter 

the area as the pack ice in Davis Strait spreads eastward during winter and 

spring. The Storis (pack ice from the east coast) might also reach into the assessment 

area from south and some influx of ringed seals is also likely to 

come from this front. Bearded seals are also associated with sea ice. They can 

make breathing holes, but only in relatively thin ice. The seasonal distribution 

of bearded seals in the West Atlantic is not known in detail, but their 

numbers increase in the assessment area during winter and spring when especially 

the Store Hellefiskebanke seems to become an important habitat. 

Harbour seals spend most of their time close to the coast. The coastal part of 

the assessment area once had the highest occurrence of these seals in Greenland, 

but their numbers declined significantly during the 20 th century. The 

species is listed on the Greenland Red List as critically endangered and in 

2010 all hunting of harbour seals in Greenland was prohibited. 

Seals and oil 

The effects of oil on seals were thoroughly reviewed by St. Aubin (1990) 

Seals are vulnerable to oil spills as oil can damage the fur, produce skin irritation 

and seriously affect the eyes as well as the mucous membranes that

surround the eyes and line the oral cavity, respiratory surfaces, the anal and 

urogenital orifices. In addition, oil can poison seals through ingestion or inhalation. 

Finally, oil spills can have a disruptive effect by interfering with 

normal behavior patterns. Effects of oil on seals have the greatest impacts on 

the pups (St. Aubin 1990 and references therein). Pups are sessile during the 

weaning period and can therefore not move away from oil spills. They are 

protected against the cold by a thick coat of woolly hair (lanugo hair) and oil 

will have a strong negative effect on the insulating properties of this fur. The 

mother seals recognise their pups by smell and a changed odour caused by 

oil might therefore affect the mother’s ability to recognise its pup. Although 

the sensory abilities of seals should allow them to detect oil spills through 

sight and smell, seals have been observed swimming in the midst of oil 

slicks, suggesting that they may not be aware of the danger posed by oil (St 

Aubin 1990). 

Hooded seal, Cystophora cristata 

Distribution and numbers: Hooded seals are migratory seals (Fig. 4.8.3). The 

vast majority of the seals from the West Atlantic population whelp in areas 

near Newfoundland, but part of the population whelp in the Davis Strait. 

The positions of this whelping patch as well as the number of seals that use 

this area for whelping change significantly from year to year. The location of 

the Davis Strait whelping patch also changes during the whelping season as 

the seals give birth on non-consolidated drifting pack ice. Published locations 

of whelping hooded seal in the Davis Strait (Sergeant 1974, 1976, 1977, 

ICES/NAFO 1997 , Kapel 1998) show that some years the hooded seal 

whelps within the assessment area and some years just outside the area. 

The hooded seals give birth in late March-early April and the lactation period 

is only 4 days (Perry & Stenson 1992). The female mate shortly after the 

lactation period and the adult seals disperse in early April. The pups will 

stay a few weeks around their birth place before they also swim away. Most 

hooded seals from the West Atlantic (both the seals that have been whelping 

near Newfoundland and in Davis Strait) swim to Southeast Greenland during 

May-June and moult on the drift ice off east Greenland in June-July. In 

August-September they swim back to Davis Strait and Baffin Bay where 

many of them forage throughout the winter regularly diving below 500 m 

(down to 1500 m (Andersen 2009)). They prey mainly on large fish and 

squids before they return to the whelping areas in spring. 

127

Figure 4.8.3. Distribution of the 

West Atlantic hooded seals. 

Numbers are the approximate 

number of seals associated with 

each of the three West Atlantic 

breeding areas in 2005. 

128 

120°W 

60°N 

50°N 

40°N 

60°W 

110°W 

40,000 

100°W 

20,000 

90°W 

50°W 

70°W 

540,000 

The total hooded seal pup production in the Northwest Atlantic (around 

Newfoundland and in Davis Strait) was estimated to be 116,900 (SE = 7,918, 

CV = 6.8%) in 2005. This corresponds to a total population of about 592,100 

seals (SE=94,800; 95% C.I.= 404,400-779,800) (ICES 2006). 

In 1984 the pup production in Davis Strait was estimated to be 19,000 

(14,000-23,000) (Bowen et al. 1987), but the estimate in 2005 was only 3,346 

(SE = 2,237, CV = 66.8%) (ICES 2006). This change is not believed to reflect a 

change in overall population size, but merely a shift in distribution, as the 

hooded seals that whelp near Newfoundland and in Davis Strait are considered 

to be animals from the same population. 

Conservation status: The West Atlantic hooded seals are listed as of Least 

Concern (LC) on the Greenland Red List. The seals are managed internationally 

through a working group under ICES and NAFO and catches are sustainable 

(ICES 2006). 

50°W 

30°W 

10°W 

40°W 

0° 

10°E 

20°E 

70°N 

60°N 

50°N 

Breeding area (March - April) 

Moulting area (June - July) 

April - June 

July - March 

0 495 990 Km 

30°W

Sensitivity: Non-whelping hooded seals are not particularly sensitive to oil 

spills and disturbance. Hooded seals can be affected by oil spills in the same 

way as all other seals (i.e. tissue damage and poisoning). 

Important and critical areas: The whelping area in Davis Strait is particularly 

sensitive to disturbance and pollution during the whelping/breeding season 

in March-April. 

Harp seal, Pagophilus groenlandica 

Distribution and numbers: Harp seals are migratory seals. The vast majority of 

the seals from the West Atlantic population concentrate around the whelping 

areas off Newfoundland in February-April. They give birth on the drift 

ice in March and they moult in April. After the moult they spread out in the 

waters between Greenland and Canada and some seals move up along the 

Greenland east coast (Fig. 4.8.4). 

The number of harp seals in the assessment area increases throughout the 

summer and early autumn, but when the sea ice starts to form they initiate 

the migration back toward the whelping areas off Newfoundland. Most 

adult harp seals during summer forage in pods typically consisting of 5–20 

individuals. Juvenile seals forage alone, but all ages feed mainly on capelin 

(Mallotus villosus) in the inshore part of the assessment area and on sand 

lance (Ammodytes spp.) on the Store Hellefiskebanke and probably in other 

off shore areas too (Kapel 1991) (Kapel 1991)and unpublished data from the 

Greenland Institute of Natural Resources). 

The West Atlantic population that whelps on the ice off Newfoundland in 

early March is estimated to have increased from around 1.8 million in the 

early 1970s to about 7-8 million individuals in 2010 (Hammill & Stenson 

2010 ). The proportion of seals that enter or pass through the assessment area 

is unknown and probably also variable, but it might be as high as 50%. The 

number of seals in the area at any given time is, however, significantly lower. 

Their number is highest during summer, but the highest concentrations 

might be found during winter when many seals are seen in a narrow band 

along the ice edge. 

The distribution pattern seems to be changing as many thousands of harp 

seals in recent years have stayed along the ice edge in the assessment area 

until few weeks before the whelping off Newfoundland. Some observations 

of seals whelping in the assessment area have also been made (Rosing-Asvid 

2008). Increased competition for food may force the seals to skip the long 

exhausting migration to areas with fewer polar bears, but climatic changes 

and periods with less ice around Newfoundland might also trigger whelping 

in new areas. 

Conservation status: Harp seal is the most numerous marine mammal in the 

northern hemisphere and the West Atlantic population is probably at the 

highest level in historic time. It is listed as of Least Concern on the Greenland 

Red List. 

129

Figure 4.8.4. Harp seal distribution 

and numbers associated with 

known whelping areas. 

130 

70°N 

60°N 

50°N 

140°W 

7-8 mill. 

160°W 

67°E 

60°W 50°W 

40°W 

50°E 

800,000 

1.1 mill. 

Critical and important habitats: Harp seals are found in all parts of the assessment 

area during most of the year and a large fraction of the population migrates 

through the assessment area during summer and autumn. Highest 

concentrations are, however, seen along the ice edge during mid-winter. 

Sensitivity: Non-breeding harp seals are less sensitive to oil spills and disturbance 

than breeding seals, but they can be severely affected by tissue 

damage and poisoning. 

Bearded seal, Erignathus barbatus 

Distribution and numbers: Bearded seals are widespread in the Arctic, but only 

little is known about their numbers and seasonal changes in distribution. 

Male bearded seals vocalise a lot during the breeding season in spring and 

individual seals can be recognised by their ‘song’. Long-term studies of 

bearded seal vocalisation show a high degree of site fidelity among male 

bearded seals (Risch et al. 2007). Seasonal changes in the densities of bearded 

seals in some areas do, however, indicate that at least part of the population 

(probably mainly the adult females and young animals) move around. These 

distribution changes seem to be linked to the seasonal changes in the sea ice 

conditions. Bearded seals do make breathing holes, but only in relatively 

thin ice. Seals that summer in areas with thick winter ice therefore either 

30°W 

60°N 

50°N 

Whelping and moulting area 

Fall - Winter 

Spring - Summer 

0 500 1,000 Km

winter in reoccurring leads and polynyas or they follow the pulse of the expanding 

and shrinking sea ice. 

Bearded seals can be found in all the parts of the assessment area and they 

are seen in the assessment area throughout the year, but the highest concentrations 

are found on Store Hellefiskebanke during mid-winter and spring 

when the edge of the Davis Strait pack ice is found in this area (GINR, unpubl. 

data). 

Bearded seals are known mainly to feed on fish and benthic invertebrates 

found at depths down to 100 m (Burns 1981). The ongoing study in South 

Greenland shows that some bearded seals also spend considerable time in 

much deeper water (>300m) and shrimps are found to be the most important 

prey in this area. 

Birth takes place in April–May on drifting ice or near ice edges with access 

to open water and the lactation period is around 24 days (Gjertz et al. 2000). 

Some bearded seals are likely to be born in the assessment area each year. 

Conservation status: The bearded seal is listed as Data Deficient on the Greenland 

Red List due to lack of knowledge about population boundaries and 

numbers, but at the same time it is listed as Least Concern, because its uniform 

and widespread distribution is believed to be a good protection against 

over-exploitation. 

Sensitivity: Bearded seals often vocalise, especially during the breeding season 

in spring (Burns 1981) and may therefore be sensitive to acoustic disturbances 

(noise). The benthic feeding habits will also make them vulnerable 

to oil-polluted benthos and bearded seals can be affected by oil spills in the 

same way as all other seals (i.e.tissue damage and poisoning). 

Critical and important habitat: Little is known about the bearded seal habitat 

use in Greenland. Their wide and uniform distribution indicates that they 

might adapt to several habitats. During winter the ice cover limits the availability 

of suitable habitats and the Store Hellefiskebanke is therefore likely to 

have a significant importance to bearded seals that during summer spread 

out over a much larger area. 

Ringed seal, Pusa hispida 

Distribution and numbers: The ringed seal habitat is all parts of the Arctic that 

have annual sea ice. They give birth in March-April in lairs dug out in a 

snowdrift that is covering a breathing hole. Some pups are born on fjord ice 

in the assessment area and others on the pack ice in the Davis Strait. The extent 

of whelping as well as the total number of ringed seals in the assessment 

area is, however, likely to fluctuate significantly depending on the ice 

and snow conditions. The pups lactate in up to 7 weeks on the fast ice in 

Canada (Hammill et al. 1991), but it is likely that pups born on the pack ice 

have a shorter lactation period, probably depending on ice breakup. The 

moulting period is mainly in June when the seals will spend most of the day 

basking on the ice. They need to haul out and therefore have to be near ice in 

this period. Their numbers therefore decline in some of the coastal areas, as 

some seals move into ice filled glacier fjords and others follow the retreating 

pack-ice north and westward. When the sea ice expands again during early 

winter they spread out again. They make breathing holes in the new ice and 

maintain them throughout the winter. This is mainly done by adult seals 

131

132 

that establish territories in ice covered areas, whereas the juvenile seals 

mainly spend the winter in areas with loose unconsolidated sea ice. 

The catches in the assessment area have been around 3,000 animals per year 

since 2003 (this has been a warm period). Catches were, however, about 

three times higher during the last cooling period in the 1990s when the packice 

from the Davis Strait was closer to the coast and the extent of sea ice in 

the fjords was larger. 

Conservation status: The ringed seals in general have a favuorable conservation 

status, because they have a relatively uniform and widespread circumpolar 

distribution, which prevents overexploitation on an overall population 

level. Ringed seals are listed as of Least Concern (LC) on the Greenland Red 

List. 

Sensitivity: Breeding ringed seals depend on stable sea ice during the 2 

months when they give birth and nurse their pups. This stationary behaviour 

makes them vulnerable to disturbance and particularly to activities 

that can disrupt the stable ice. However, ringed seals were not particularly 

shy towards seismic operations in Arctic Canada, where they showed only 

little avoidance of the ships (Lee et al. 2005). Ringed seals can be affected by 

oil spills in the same way as all other seals (i.e. tissue damage and poisoning). 

Figure 4.8.5. Ringed seal lair with pup. Picture of a display in the zoological museum in Copenhagen (Photo Aqqalu Rosing- 

Asvid).

Critical and important habitats: The relatively uniform and widespread circumpolar 

distribution of ringed seals implies that there are no areas that are 

critical for the total population. Any disruption of fast ice can, however, 

have strong influence on local nursing ringed seals in spring. 

Harbour seal, Phoca vitulina 

Distribution and numbers: The harbour seal habitat is the coastal zone. These 

seals have only inhabited the Greenland waters during the interglacial period 

and they are relatively few compared to the other Arctic seal species. 

They concentrate in colonies on land during breeding and moulting, and 

their link to coastal waters and strong site fidelity toward certain haul-out 

sites during breeding and moulting have made them vulnerable to hunting. 

They give birth in June on sandbanks in fjords or on small islands off the 

coast. Up until the 1950s harbour seals were relatively common in the assessment 

area, but hunting has driven them to near extinction (Rosing-Asvid 

2010 ). In the recent decade only three concentrations of harbour seals have 

been registered in the assessment area by the Greenland Institute of Natural 

Resources. One is on the sandbanks near the Kangerlussuaq airport 

(67˚00Ń; 50˚45´W) where seven harbour seals were seen in 2009. Hunters 

have reported another concentration of 60-100 seals about 70-80 km upstream 

the meltwater river, Majoqqaq (65˚53Ń; 50˚38´W). These seals might, 

however, have moved elsewhere as they have not been observed since 2007. 

The third location is sandbanks in Alangorlia (63˚37Ń - 50˚32´W) where 

about 20 seals have been observed in both 2009 and 2010. The winter distribution 

of these seals is unknown (Rosing-Asvid 2011). 

Conservation status: Harbour seals are listed as critically endangered on the 

Greenland Red List. 

Sensitivity: The known concentrations of harbour seals are two sites in the 

bottom of deep fjords and one upstream in a river. These areas are not likely 

to be affected by off shore oil exploration. It is, however, possible (and likely) 

that unknown colonies of harbour seals exist on remote offshore islands 

that might be more affected by oil spills. 

Critical and important habitats: Harbour seals show strong site fidelity to 

breeding or moulting locations. 

4.8.3 Whales, dolphins and porpoises (order Cetacea) 

Tenna Kragh Boye, Malene Simon, Fernando Ugarte (GINR) & Kasper Johansen 

(AU) 

The order Cetacea, which includes whales, dolphins and porpoises, is divided 

into two sub-orders: Mysticeti (baleen whales) and Odontoceti (toothed 

whales). As their English name clearly indicates, the main difference between 

baleen whales and toothed whales is that the former use baleen plates 

hanging from the roof of their mouths to catch their prey, while the later 

have teeth. There are also general differences in their residency and migration 

patterns, with most baleen whales showing well defined seasonal migrations 

between breeding and feeding grounds. Most relevant for evaluating 

the impact of human activities, baleen whales and toothed whales differ 

in the frequency ranges of the sounds used for communication, navigation 

and feeding. Baleen whales emit low frequency calls (10-10,000 Hz), audible 

over distances of tens of kilometres (Mellinger et al. 2007). In contrast, 

133

134 

toothed whales use higher frequencies (80 Hz-130 kHz) to produce tonal 

sounds for communication, and echolocation clicks used for communication 

and to gain detailed information about objects ahead of the animal by listening 

to the reflected echoes (Mellinger et al. 2007). An overview of the frequencies 

used by the cetaceans present in the assessment area is given in table 

4.8.1 and figure 4.8.6. 

For the reasons explained above, hearing and sound production are vital for 

cetaceans and they can be affected by human made noise, including the 

sounds produced by hydrocarbon exploration and exploitation activities. 

Potential effects from anthropogenic sound include behavioural changes 

(e.g. avoidance of the area or disruption of feeding), physical damage (mainly 

to auditory organs) and masking (obscuring of sounds of interest to the 

animal by interfering sounds). The sensitivity of cetaceans to anthropogenic 

sounds from hydrocarbon exploration and development activities is discussed 

in detail in chapter 10. Cetaceans are also sensitive to oil spills and 

this is discussed in chapter 11. 

Table 4.8.1. The frequency range of the most commonly used sound types of cetaceans in the assessment area. The frequency 

range is given by the minimum and maximum frequencies in Hz 

Species Latin 

Odontocetes 

Sound 

type 

Min 

freq. (Hz) 

Max 

freq. (Hz) References 

Harbour porpoise Phocoena phocoena Click 120,000 150,000 (Villadsgaard et al. 2007) 

White beaked dolphin Lagenorhynchus albirostris Click 75,000 250,000 (Rasmussen & Miller 2002) 

Whistle 3,000 35,000 (Rasmussen & Miller 2002) 

Long-finned pilot whale Globicephala melas Click 4,100 95,000 (Eskesen et al. 2011) 

Whistle 260 20,000 (Rendell & Gordon 1999) 

Narwhal Monodon monoceros Click 24,000 95,000 (Miller et al. 1995) 

Whistle 300 18,000 (Ford & Fisher 1978) 

Beluga Delphinapterus leucas Click 46,600 112,600 (Au et al. 1985) 

Whistle 1,400 14,000 (Belikov & Bel’kovich 2006, 2007) 

Killer whale Orcinus orca Click 30,000 100,000 (Simon et al. 2007) 

Whist- 

le/call 1,500 18,000 (Ford 1989, Thomsen et al. 2001) 

N. bottlenose whale Hyperoodon ampullatus Click 2,000 26,000 (Hooker & Whitehead 2002) 

Sperm whale Physeter macrocephalus Click 5,000 24,000 (Madsen et al. 2002) 

Mysticetes 

Minke whale Balaenoptera acutorostrata Call / song 80 800 (Mellinger et al. 2000) 

Sei whale Balaenoptera borealis Call / song 30 400 (Rankin & Barlow 2007) 

Humpback whale Megaptera novaeangliae Call / song 35 24,000 (Payne & Payne 1985) 

Fin whale Balaenoptera physalus Call / song 15 30 (Watkins et al. 1987) 

Blue whale Balaenoptera musculus Call / song 14 20 (Cummings & Thompson 1971) 

Bowhead whale Balaena mysticetus Call / song 100 5,000 (Ljungblad et al. 1982)

Figure 4.8.6. The main frequency 

range of sounds used by cetaceans 


See also Table 4.8.1 for details. 

Frequenzy (Hz) 

10 100 1000 10000 100000 1000000 

Recent knowledge about the distribution and abundance of cetaceans in the 

assessment area comes from aerial surveys carried out by GINR in September 

2005, April 2006 and September 2007, as well as from passive acoustic 

monitoring (PAM) moored across the Davis Strait, at the northern edge of 

the assessment area, recording continuously from October 2006 to September 

2008. Additional information about the seasonality, distribution and biology 

of cetaceans comes from a variety of sources, including scientific studies, 

catch statistics and observations from marine mammal observers on 

board seismic surveys. 

With the exception of blue whales, sei whales and sperm whales, which are 

protected by law, and bottlenose whale, whose blubber has a laxative effect, 

all cetaceans are hunted in Greenland and are considered as an important 

resource for both economic and cultural reasons. Hunting is explained in 

more detail in chapter 5. 

4.8.4 Baleen whales (Mysticeti) 

Habour porpoise 

White beaked dolphin 

Long-finnes pilot whale 

Narwhal 

Beluga 

Killer whale 

Northern bottlenose whale 

Sperm whale 

Minke whale 

Sei whale 

Humpback whale 

Fin whale 

Blue whale 

Bowhead whale 

The six species of baleen whales occurring in the assessment area belong to 

two families: rorquals (Balaenopteridae, five species) and right whales 

(Balaenidae, one species). Among the rorquals, minke whales (Balaenoptera 

acutorostrata), fin whales (Balaenoptera physalus), humpback whales (Megaptera 

novaeangliae) and sei whales (Balaenoptera borealis) are seasonal inhabitants 

and relatively abundant. Blue whales (Balaenoptera musculus) are rare, 

but also seasonally present. The bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus) migrates 

seasonally through the assessment area. The bowhead whale is one of 

the two species of the right whale family that inhabit the North Atlantic. The 

critically endangered northern right whale (Eubalaena glacialis) may have 

used the assessment area in the past, but its current distribution in Greenland 

may be limited to the Cape Farewell area, south of the assessment area. 

135

136 

West Greenland is an important foraging area where baleen whales target 

dense patches of prey and the distribution of the whales is correlated with 

certain prey items, such as capelin (Mallotus villosus), krill (Meganyctiphanes 

norvegica and Thysanoessa sp.) and sandeels (Ammodytes sp.) (Heide-Jørgensen 

& Laidre 2007, Laidre et al. 2010, Simon 2010). For instance, during a survey 

focusing on the distribution of cetaceans, krill and capelin in September 

2005, the overall distribution of fin, minke, humpback and sei whales was 

strongly correlated with high densities of krill deeper than 150 m, with a 

high density area within the assessment area and one south of the assessment 

area (Laidre et al. 2010). Previous studies have shown how a sudden 

shift in distribution of the prey resources may cause an equivalent shift in 

the distribution of the whales (Weinrich et al. 1997). Therefore, changes in 

prey distribution due to climatic changes may be an important link to predict 

potential changes in distribution and abundance of baleen whales in the 

assessment area and other areas in Greenland. 

Besides prey, sea ice is a limiting factor for the northern distribution of fin 

whales and this may also be true for other species of rorquals (Simon et al. 

2010). Therefore, changes in sea ice coverage are likely to have an effect on 

the distribution of baleen whales in the assessment area. In the following 

text we will focus on the biology and occurrence of the different species of 

baleen whales within the assessment area. 

Fin whale, Balaenoptera physalus 

The North Atlantic fin whales reach an average length of 19–20 m and an 

average weight of 45–75 tonnes, which makes them the second largest animal 

on the planet next to blue whales. Fin whales are found worldwide from 

temperate to polar waters but are less common in the tropics. About 3,200 

fin whales seasonally visit West Greenland waters (from Cape Farewell to 

North of Disko Island) with an especially large abundance within the assessment 

area along the 200 m contour (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2008a, Laidre 

et al. 2010). In Greenland, fin whales target prey such as sandeels, offshore 

patches of krill and coastal aggregations of capelin (Kapel 1979). The strong 

correlation between off shore krill abundance and high density of fin whales 

indicates that the assessment area is an important fin whale feeding ground 

(Laidre et al. 2010). 

Fin whales are believed to migrate south to unknown breeding grounds during 

winter, yet passive acoustic monitoring shows that fin whales are present 

in Davis Strait until end December and the increased fin whale song 

suggest that mating starts in October-November while the whales are still in 

the assessment area (Simon et al. 2010). The Southward migration of the fin 

whales coincides with the formation of sea ice, suggesting that ice coverage 

is an important limiting factor for the northern distribution of fin whales 

during winter (Simon et al. 2010). 

In Greenland, fin whales are placed in the category of least concern on the 

Greenland Red List due to the large abundance and signs of increase in the 

North Atlantic (Boertmann 2007). However on a global scale the species is 

considered as endangered as a result of a major decline in abundance of fin 

whales due to whaling in the Southern hemisphere (IUCN 2008). 

Minke whale, Balaenoptera acutorostrata 

The minke whale is the smallest (about 7 m and 8 tonnes) and most abundant 

baleen whale in Greenlandic waters. They migrate between low lati-

tude breeding grounds and high latitude feeding grounds arriving in Greenland 

during spring. The population in West Greenland is currently (2007) estimated 

as larger than 16,609 animals (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2008b, Heide- 

Jørgensen et al. 2010d); however large variations in relative minke whale 

abundance across years suggest that the fraction of minke whales using the 

West Greenland banks as a summer feeding ground may vary from year to 

year (Heide-Jørgensen & Laidre 2008). There is molecular evidence that 

minke whales in the assessment area belong to a distinct population that 

summers in what the International Whaling Commission recognises as the 

West Greenland management area (Andersen et al. 2003, Born et al. 2007). 

As many other species, minke whales are likely to move between Greenland 

and East Canada (Horwood 1989). Furthermore, minke whale catch data 

show distinct sexual segregation in the West Greenland subpopulation 

where mostly females are found within the assessment area and in Northwest 

Greenland while males tend to migrate to Southwest Greenland 

(Laidre et al. 2009) 

Minke whales are found both offshore and inshore in bays and fjords within 

the entire assessment area. They are the most icthyophagous of the baleen 

whales and feed mainly on sandeel and capelin (Kapel 1979). Both IUCN 

(2008) and the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007) places minke whales in 

the Least Concern category. 

Humpback whale, Megaptera novaeangliae 

Humpback whales are about 13 m long and weigh 28 tonnes. They migrate 

between their low-latitude breeding grounds in the Caribbean and the highlatitude 

feeding ground in Greenland. They arrive in the assessment area in 

spring (May) and stay until late autumn (October). However, a minority of 

individuals skip the migration and overwinter in Greenlandic waters (Simon 

2010). 

Humpback whales in Greenland feed mainly on capelin, sandeel and krill. 

They travel along the coast into fjords and bays to benefit from shallow aggregations 

of capelin (Heide-Jørgensen & Laidre 2007). Yet, it seems like the 

majority of humpback whales stay offshore to take advantage of large prey 

patches on the banks with a high density humpback whale area within the 

assessment area (Laidre et al. 2010). Although individual humpback whales 

show site fidelity toward specific foraging sites, returning year after year to 

the same area within few kilometres (Boye et al. 2010), they do not stay in 

the same area for the entire feeding season but travel between foraging sites 

(Heide-Jørgensen & Laidre 2007). 

In 1966 humpback whales became protected from commercial whaling and 

in 1986 a moratorium was established. In 1981, Whitehead et al. (1983) estimated 

the population size of West Greenland humpback whales to constitute 

85-200 animals. The many years of protection has resulted in an increase 

of humpback whale abundance. Today around 3,000 humpback whales feed 

along the West coast of Greenland and the rate of increase is estimated to 

9.4% per year (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2008 , Heide-Jørgensen et al. in press). 

Hence, humpback whales are considered as least concern on both the IUCN 

Red List (2008) and the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

Sei whale, Balaenoptera borealis 

Sei whales are on average 14 m long and weigh 20–25 tonnes. They feed almost 

exclusively on krill (Kapel 1979); although small schooling fish and 

137

138 

squid form an important part of their diet in some areas. The species is believed 

to make seasonal migrations between low-latitude wintering grounds 

and high-latitude feeding grounds. However, the distribution of sei whales 

is poorly understood and the occurrence of sei whales in West Greenland 

may be linked to years with increased influx of warm currents from East 

Greenland (Kapel 1985). Sei whale sound signals were recorded in the Davis 

Strait in August-September, 2006-07 (Simon 2010). The abundance of sei 

whales in West Greenland was estimated from a ship survey in 2005 to 1,599 

individuals (95% CI=690-3,705). As with fin, humpback and minke whales, 

there was a high density area within the assessment area. The overall distribution 

of these rorquals is correlated with high densities of krill deeper than 

150 m (Laidre et al. 2010). Sei whales are considered endangered on the 

IUCN Red List (2008) of threatened species and as data deficient on the 

Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

Blue whale, Balaenoptera musculus 

Blue whales are the largest animals ever to have existed on earth and reach 

an average length of 25 m and weigh up to 120 tonnes. Blue whales are globally 

distributed from the low latitudes to polar waters, where dense pack ice 

and the ice edge limit their northern and southern distributions (Norris 

1977). As with other rorquals, it is assumed that blue whales travel between 

foraging areas at high latitudes in the summer and low-latitude breeding areas 

during winter. Their main prey is krill but also capelin and sandeels are 

part of their diet (Kapel 1979). 

Observations of blue whales in West Greenland are rare and their presence 

in the assessment area is poorly known. Yet several sightings have been reported 

within the assessment area between 62°-66°N and individuals have 

been documented to travel between foraging areas in Gulf of St. Lawrence to 

West Greenland, which suggests a shared population of blue whales between 

West Greenland and Eastern Canada (Sears & Larsen 2002). Passive 

acoustic monitoring in 2006-2007 revealed blue whale calls in August- 

September in the Davis Strait (Simon 2010). 

Globally, blue whales are considered as endangered on the IUCN Red List 

(2008) because most populations, including those in the North Atlantic, were 

decimated by whaling in the 20 th century. The number of blue whales occurring 

in West Greenland is unknown and therefore the species is classified as 

data deficient on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). In the Central 

North Atlantic, blue whales are common only around Iceland/East Greenland, 

when sighting surveys between 1987 and 2001 indicate about 1,000 

blue whales and the population may be growing at a rate of about 4-5% per 

year (Pike et al. 2010). Blue whales are extremely rare in the Eastern North 

Atlantic and in the Western North Atlantic only common in the Gulf of St. 

Lawrence, where about 400 animals have been photo-identified (Ramp et al. 

2006). The stock structure of blue whales in the North Atlantic is unknown, 

but the different timings of depletions in Norway, Iceland and the Western 

Atlantic suggest that discrete feeding aggregations exist. 

Bowhead whale, Balaena mysticetus 

Bowhead whales are long-lived and may be more than 200 years old (George 

et al. 1999). They reach a length of 14-18 m and a weight 60-100 tonnes. The 

bowhead whales belonging to the Baffin Bay stock spend most of the year in 

the Canadian high Arctic around Baffin Island (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 

2010b). In winter (January-February) part of the population migrates to West

Figure 4.8.7. Migration routes for 

bowhead whales in the Davis 

Strait and Baffin Bay. In January- 

February the whales migrate 

through the assessment area on 

their way to feeding/mating 

grounds just north of the assessment 

area (hatched area). 

Greenland to feed on the high densities of Arctic copepods in Disko Bay 

(Fig. 4.8.7) (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2006, Laidre et al. 2007, Heide-Jørgensen 

et al. 2010b). The whales migrating to West Greenland constitute 78% females 

and besides for feeding the whales may use the area as a mating 

ground (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2010b). An unknown number of individuals 

pass through the assessment area during their migration between Canada 

and West Greenland. This is further supported by passive acoustic monitoring 

in Davis Strait with recordings of bowhead whale song from January to 

June and a clear peak in March-May (Simon 2010). 

Extensive commercial whaling of bowhead whales reduced the stock to a 

level where whaling was no longer profitable at the end of the 19 th century 

(Ross 1993 ) and sightings were rare in West Greenland. However, the stock 

is now recovering and the whales have returned to the Disko Bay feeding/mating 

area. The most recent estimate of bowhead whales in Disko Bay 

is 1229 (95% CI 495-2939) bowhead whales (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2007a) 

and the bowhead whale is now listed as least concern on the IUCN Red Llist 

(2008) and as nearly threatened on the Greenlandic Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 

0 150 300 Km 

60°N 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

139

140 

4.8.5 Toothed whales (Odontoceti) 

Eight species of toothed whales possibly occur in the assessment area: longfinned 

pilot whale (Globicephala melas), white-beaked dolphin (Lagenorhynchus 

albirostris) harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena), narwhal (Monodon 

monoceros) beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas), killer whale (Orcinus orca), 

sperm whale (Physeter macrocephalus) and northern bottlenose whale (Hyperoodon 

ampullatus). As for the baleen whales, a change in prey distribution or 

ice coverage, e.g. due to climatic changes, is likely to cause a change in the 

toothed whale distribution. The distribution of e.g. the beluga whale depends 

largely on the distribution of ice coverage, the whale staying close to 

the edge of the pack ice and moving further north or further west, further 

offshore if any loosening in the pack ice occurs (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2009). 

Hence, changes in ice coverage and in temperature may change the distribution 

of certain species of toothed whales. 

Sperm whale, Physeter macrocephalus 

Sperm whales are the largest of the toothed whales and reach lengths of 18 

m and weights of 50 tonnes. Although they are found in all oceans, the species 

display sexual segregation where females and calves reside in tropical 

and sub-tropical waters year round, while males inhabit high latitude feeding 

grounds with occasional visits to their low latitude breeding grounds 

(Best 1979). Sperm whales prey on a variety of deep-sea fish and cephalopods. 

Stomach samples from 221 sperm whales caught between Iceland and 

Greenland showed that benthic or pelagic fish (especially the lumpsucker, 

Cyclopterus lumpus) constituted the majority of the diet but also oceanic cephalopods 

were an important part of the sperm whale diet in this area (Martin & 

Clarke 1986). Stomach content of sperm whales caught in West Greenland 

contained exclusively fish (Kapel 1979). 

The abundance of sperm whales in Greenland and within the assessment area 

is not known but sperm whales are encountered on a regular basis (e.g. 

Larsen et al. 1989). Sperm whales are found mainly in deep waters along the 

continental slope, but they can also be seen in deep fjords and have been observed 

in the Nuuk fjord system, within the assessment area, in both 2009 

and 2010 (GINR, unpubl. data). Echolocation clicks of sperm whales have also 

been recorded close to the West Greenlandic continental shelf in the Davis 

Strait (GINR, Unpubl.). Male sperm whales feed both at shallow depths of 

approximately 117 m and at the sea bottom at depths down to 1860 m, showing 

that male sperm whales have flexible feeding habits (Teloni et al. 2008). 

Sperm whales are expected to use the assessment area during ice-free periods 

in suitable habitat, such as deep-sea waters close to continental slopes 

and underwater canyons with abundance of cephalopod or fish prey. 

The International Whaling Commission considers the North Atlantic sperm 

whales as belonging to a single population (Donovan 1991), which is further 

supported by genetic analyses (Lyrholm & Gyllensten 1998). On a global 

scale sperm whales are categorised as vulnerable (IUCN 2008), but due to 

poor documentation of sperm whale abundance around Greenland the species 

is listed as not evaluated on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

Long-finned pilot whale, Globicephala melas 

The long-finned pilot whale occurs in temperate and sub-polar zones, but is 

according to Greenlandic catch statistics occasionally also found as far North 

as Upernavik (DFFL, unpubl. data). In the USA, long-finned pilot whales 

have seasonal movements that appear to be dictated by their main prey, the

long-finned squid (Loligo pealei) (Payne & Heinemann 1993, Gannon et al. 

1997). Long finned pilot whales are found in groups of up to 100 individuals. 

Recently, distribution and abundance of pilot whales were estimated along 

the West Greenland coast, based on an aerial survey from 2007. The survey 

showed that pilot whales also here preferred deep offshore waters and the 

largest abundance was found within the northernmost part of the assessment 

area in Store Hellefiskebanke (Hansen 2010). Groups were also found 

further South within the assessment area (on Lille Hellefiskebanke and 

Danas Banke) and Hansen et al. (2010) estimated the West Greenland population 

to constitute 7,440 individuals. Pilot whales occurring in the assessment 

area (and the rest of Greenland) probably belong to a large North Atlantic 

population whose range extends beyond the assessment area. Based 

on comparisons of body measurements of long finned pilot whales from 

Newfoundland and the Faroe Islands, Bloch & Lastein (1993) suggested that 

pilot whales from the eastern and western North Atlantic are segregated into 

two separate stocks. A genetic comparison of long-fined pilot whales from 

the US East Coast, West Greenland, the Faeroe Islands and the UK showed 

that West Greenland pilot whales are distinct from those in the other locations 

and suggests that population isolation occurs between areas of the 

ocean which differ in sea surface temperature (Fullard et al. 2000). Abundance 

in the Central and Eastern North Atlantic has been estimated to 

780,000 animals (Buckland et al. 1993), while relative abundance in Newfoundland 

was estimated at 13,200 individuals in 1980 (Hay 1982). Hence pilot 

whales are abundant and considered as least concern on the Greenland 

Redlist (Boertmann 2007) and as Data deficient on the IUCN Red List (2008) 

due to inadequate data on abundance at a global level. 

White-beaked dolphin, Lagenorhynchus albirostris 

White-beaked dolphins are endemic to the North Atlantic Ocean where they 

inhabit cold temperate and sub-Arctic areas (Reeves et al. 1999). Here, they 

feed on a variety of small schooling fishes such as herring, cod and whiting, 

along with squid and crustaceans (Jefferson et al. 2008). Their diet within 

Greenlandic waters is not known, but cod, capelin and sandeels may constitute 

prey items. White-beaked dolphins are mostly found in groups of up to 

30 individuals but may occur in larger groups of hundreds of individuals 

(Rasmussen 1999, Jefferson et al. 2008). They occur in offshore waters and on 

continental shelves. In West Greenland a recent study has shown that the 

species is found between the coastline and up to 90 km offshore and a positive 

correlation between depth, slope and abundance of white beaked dolphins 

was documented, with larger abundances on steep slopes and in deep 

waters (Hansen 2010). The same study found a correlation between depth 

and group size, with smaller groups occurring in deep water while larger 

groups were found at depths between 300-1,000 m. 

White-beaked dolphins are present within the entire range of the assessment 

area, but the majority is found in South Greenland rather than the Disko area, 

which appears to represent the northern range of the species (Reeves et 

al. 1999, Hansen 2010). However, unverified catch statistics indicate that 

white-beaked dolphins may occur as far north as Upernavik (GINR, unpubl. 

data). White-beaked dolphins are poorly studied in West Greenland and the 

first abundance estimate was only recently calculated to constitute 11,800 animals 

in West Greenland (Hansen 2010). White-beaked dolphins are considered 

as not applicable on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). 

141

142 

Killer whale, Orcinus orca 

These top predators are found in all oceans, at various depths and do not 

seem to have any latitudinal restrictions on their home range, other than sea 

ice. However, abundance is higher in colder waters near the shore (Jefferson 

et al. 2008). Killer whales feed on prey varying from small schooling fish to 

large marine mammals and their high dietary specialisations divides them 

into ecotypes. Examples of prey choice are herring in Norway (Christensen 

1982), sharks in New Zealand (Visser 2005), sea lions and elephant seals in 

Patagonia (Lopez & Lopez 1985) and either minke whales, fish or seals and 

penguins in Antarctic (Pitman & Ensor 2003). Mating between different ecotypes 

rarely occurs (Pilot et al. 2009). Killer whales live in natal pods where 

mating occur outside the pod during interaction with other groups (Pilot et 

al. 2009). Groups most often contain between 3-30 individuals but may count 

more than 100 animals (review in Baird 2000). 

Studies on killer whales in Greenland are almost non-existent and their distribution 

is very poorly understood. Yet, Heide-Jørgensen (1988) reviewed 

published and unpublished information available on killer whales in Greenland 

and carried out a questionnaire-based investigation of sightings of killer 

whales. He found that killer whales were observed in all areas of West 

Greenland, with more sightings in Qaanaaq, Disko, Nuuk and Qaqortoq. 

However sightings are sparse along the West Greenland coast (Teilmann & 

Dietz 1998). 

It is not known whether the killer whales found in Greenland constitute 

their own population or are part of a larger population within the Atlantic 

Ocean. The notion of a population in the Northeast Atlantic with a range including 

West Greenland and East Canada is supported by satellite tracking 

of a single individual from August to November 2009 that moved from the 

Canadian High Arctic (Lancaster Sound) , via Baffin Bay and the Davis 

Strait, to waters west of the Azores (Petersen et al. 2009). Due to the scarce 

knowledge in Greenland, killer whales are listed as not applicable on the 

Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). Despite the extensive studies on killer 

whales in other areas of the world they are listed as data deficient on the 

IUCN Red List (IUCN 2008) due to ambiguities regarding taxonomy. 

Harbour porpoises, Phocoena phocoena 

Harbour porpoises are the smallest cetaceans found in Greenland and reach 

a length of 1.8m and a weight of up to 90 kg. It is amongst the most abundant 

whale species in the North Atlantic and also in West Greenland where 

it occurs from the southernmost tip to the Avanersuaq district in Northwest 

Greenland (Teilmann & Dietz 1998). However, the main distribution of harbour 

porpoises in West Greenland lies between Sisimiut and Paamiut 

(Teilmann & Dietz 1998), which corresponds to the range of the entire assessment 

area from 62°-67°N. In West Greenland the harbour porpoises inhabit 

fjords, coastal and continental shelf areas and abundance decreases 

with depth (Hansen 2010). Although ice formation forces harbour porpoises 

to leave the area north of Disko from January to April, catch statistics show 

that they are present year round in West Greenland. Yet, it is possible that 

the majority leave the coast for offshore waters during late autumn and return 

during spring (Teilmann & Dietz 1998). 

Their main prey consists of fish and squid and in West Greenland capelin 

(Mallotus villosus) is the predominant part of their diet (Lockyer et al. 2003).

Until recently the abundance of harbour porpoises in West Greenland was 

unknown, but stock size has now been estimated to approximately 33,300 

animals (Hansen 2010). It is believed that this stock is separated from neighbouring 

populations in Iceland and Newfoundland. Because population size 

has only recently been estimated it is not clear yet whether the hunting of 

harbour porpoise in Greenland is sustainable. Hence, harbour porpoises are 

listed as data deficient on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007), but their 

large abundance in the Northern hemisphere puts them in the least concern 

category on the IUCN Red List (IUCN 2008). 

Beluga whale, Delphinapterus leucas 

Beluga whales reach a length up to 5 metres and a weight of 1,500 kg and 

although they are born grey they turn white with age. They prey mainly on 

fish, especially polar cod but also squid and shrimp constitute a part of their 

diet (Heide-Jørgensen & Teilmann 1994). Beluga whales most often travel in 

groups of two to ten whales, but larger groups are not uncommon. 

Beluga whales only occur in the Arctic and Subarctic region, where they live 

among the pack ice in leads and polynias during winter and migrate to shallow 

bays and estuaries during summer (NAMMCO 2008). The beluga 

whales found in West Greenland during winter spend the summer in the 

Canadian High Arctic archipelago and tagging with satellite transmitters indicates 

that only a fraction of the whales travel to West Greenland while the 

majority most likely reside in the North Water Polynia (Heide-Jørgensen et 

al. 2003a). The whales that do travel to West Greenland migrate along the 

North West Greenland coast and arrive at more southern feeding areas 

South of Disko in December, where they remain scattered on the shallow 

banks until spring (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2009). Although beluga whales 

occur within the northern part of the assessment area they do not have their 

main distribution in this area. Instead Store Hellefiskebanke just north of the 

assessment area supports high densities of beluga whales, where only ice 

coverage seem to be the limiting factor of this species’ movements further 

north or offshore (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2009). Beluga whales are expected 

to acquire the major part of their annual food intake in their winter quarters 

(Fig. 4.8.8). 

The wintering whales in West Greenland and the North Water are considered 

as two different stocks, both of which spend the summer in the Canadian 

High Arctic (NAMMCO 2008). The latest abundance estimate of the West 

Greenland stock was calculated in 2006 to constitute 10,595 individuals and 

the stock is considered substantially depleted (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2009, 

NAMMCO 2008). Due to this, beluga whales in West Greenland are considered 

as critically endangered on the Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). Yet, 

on a global scale they are categorised as near threatened (IUCN 2008). 

143

Figure 4.8.8. Map of known 

wintering grounds for beluga 

whales in West Greenland and 

eastern Nunavut. Summering 

grounds are in Arctic Canada. 

Belugas can be found along the 

whole northwest coast of Greenland 

during migration between 

winter and summer grounds. Map 

modified from Heide-Jørgensen & 

Laidre (2006). 

144 

75°N 

72°N 

69°N 

66°N 

63°N 

96°W 

90°W 

Beluga whale 


Wintering areas 

0 175 350 Km 

84°W 

78°W 

60°W 

72°W 

Narwhal, Monodon monoceros 

Narwhals are found only in high arctic regions where they feed primarily on 

Greenland halibut but also on other species of arctic fish and squid (Laidre & 

Heide-Jørgensen 2005). They undertake seasonal migrations between shallow 

summer grounds where little or no foraging takes place and their wintering 

grounds where they feed (Dietz & Heide-Jørgensen 1995, Laidre & 

Heide-Jørgensen 2005, Dietz et al. 2008). Narwhals are site faithful to summering 

and wintering grounds and individuals tagged with satellite transmitters 

have migrated between summering grounds in Arctic Canada and 

Melville Bay and wintering grounds in Baffin Bay and the northern Davis 

Strait. Wintering grounds include both deep waters between Greenland and 

Canada and waters close to the coast of West Greenland (Fig. 4.8.9) (Dietz & 

Heide-Jørgensen 1995, Dietz et al. 2001, Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2003b, Dietz 

et al. 2008). They reside in or close to the pack ice during winter and as the 

ice opens up into large channels in spring the narwhals return to their summering 

grounds. 

66°W 

60°W 

54°W 

54°W 

48°W 

42°W 

48°W 

36°W 

78°N 

75°N 

72°N 

69°N 

66°N 

63°N

Figure 4.8.9. Main summer and 

winter grounds of narwhals in 

West Greenland and the Eastern 

Canadian Arctic. Narwhals can 

be found along the whole northwest 

coast of Greenland during 

migration between winter and 

summer grounds. Map modified 

from Heide-Jørgensen & Laidre 

(2006). 

70°N 

66°N 

62°N 

Peel Sound 

108°W 

CANADA 

Sommerset 

Island 

Admirality Inlet 

Foxe Basin 

Narwhal 


0 

58°N 

200 400 Km 

76°W 

100°W 

Eclipse 

Sound 

Jones 

Sound 

Baffin Island 

68°W 

92°W 

Smith Sound 

Baffin Bay 

Northern 

offshore 

wintering 

ground 

Southern 

offshore 

wintering 

ground 

Inglefield 

Bredning 

Davis Strait 

GREENLAND 

Melville 

Bay 

Disko 

Bay 

Intense benthic feeding behaviour has been documented for narwhals on 

their winter feeding grounds and suggests that a major portion of the annual 

energy intake is obtained on these winter feeding grounds (Laidre et al. 

2004, Laidre & Heide-Jørgensen 2005). Hence, the wintering grounds are 

likely to be the most critically important habitat for narwhals (Laidre et al. 

2008). Furthermore, a significant portion of the global population of narwhals 

winters in the northern Davis Strait and southern Baffin Bay area. 

The northern part of the assessment area may overlap with the southern part 

of narwhal wintering grounds. There are about 18,000 narwhals wintering in 

the offshore pack ice (Laidre & Heide-Jørgensen 2011). These narwhals can 

be found at extremely high densities (average 77 narwhals km 2 open water 

in 2008) in leads in dense pack ice (Laidre & Heide-Jørgensen 2011). There 

were approximately 6,500 narwhals in the wintering ground in West Greenland 

in 2006 (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 2010c). As mentioned above, the narwhals 

wintering in or close to the assessment area come from a number of 

summer grounds in Arctic Canada and North West Greenland. Based on a 

series of surveys in 2002-2004, it was estimated that more than 60,000 nar- 

84°W 

60°W 

76°W 

68°W 

60°W 

52°W 

52°W 44°W 

78°N 

74°N 

70°N 

66°N 

62°N 

145

146 

whals spend the summer spread over several locations in High Arctic Canada 

(Richard et al. 2010). The abundances of narwhals in Inglefield Bredning 

and Melville Bay, Northwest Greenland, in 2007 were 8,368 (95% CI: 5,209– 

13,442) and 6,024 (95% CI: 1,403–25,860), respectively (Heide-Jørgensen et al. 

2010c). 

Due to intense hunting in the past, the stocks in Greenland have been under 

great pressure and narwhals are considered as critically endangered on the 

Greenland Red List (Boertmann 2007). On a global scale, narwhals are subject 

to differing levels of threats and are placed in the category near threatened 

on the IUCN Red List (IUCN 2008). 

Northern bottlenose whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus 

This species is found only in the North Atlantic, where they inhabit deep 

waters off the continental shelf and near submarine canyons (Jefferson et al. 

2008). This 7-9 metre long whale is a deep diving species, diving as deep as 

1,400 meters (Hooker & Baird 1999) to forage primarily on squid (e.g. Lick & 

Piatkowski 1998) but other invertebrates and fish also constitute their diet. 

They live in groups where especially the males may form long-term associations 

(Gowans et al. 2001). The bottlenose whales are present in Greenland 

during summer (Mosbech et al. 2007) and are common in the assessment area. 

However, because the species has been poorly studied in Greenland, 

abundance distribution and seasonality patterns along the West coast are 

unknown. The only place where bottlenose whales have been studied in detail 

is off Nova Scotia, Canada, where they show high site fidelity, relatively 

small home range and little genetic exchange with other areas (Hooker et al. 

2002, Whitehead & Wimmer 2005, Dalebout et al. 2006). All these factors 

make bottlenose whales vulnerable to the effect of human activities. 

Due to the scarce knowledge on bottlenose whales in Greenland, the species 

is listed as not applicable on the Greenland Redlist (Boertmann 2007). Also, 

the lack of data regarding the effects of anthropogenic disturbance along 

with depletion of stocks due to previous whaling places the species as data 

deficient on a global scale (IUCN 2008). 

4.9 Summary of Valued Ecosystem Components (VECs) 

As part of an environmental impact assessment of an area, the concept of 

Valued Ecosystem Components (VEC) is sometimes applied. The idea is to 

identify important ecosystem components, because it is often not possible to 

evaluate all ecological components individually. VECs can be species, populations, 

biological events or other environmental features that are important 

to the human population (not only economically), have a national or international 

profile, can act as indicators of environmental change, or can be the 

focus of management or other administrative efforts. VECs can also be important 

flora and fauna groups, habitats and processes such as the spring 

bloom in primary production. 

Based on the available knowledge, summarised in the preceding sections, 

and an evaluation of the ecological, economic and cultural importance of organisms 

and habitats, the following VECs are suggested for the Davis Strait 

assessment area. See chapter 9 for a more detailed description of the VEC 

concept and how it has been applied here.

4.9.1 Pelagic hotspots 

The shelf bank areas (e.g. Fyllas Banke) and the shelf break are assumed to 

have increased primary productivity in spring due to nutrient-rich 

upwelling events from wind and tidal motions in the Davis Strait. There are 

limited data in the assessment area, in terms of physical measurements on 

primary productivity, to support this; however, remote sensing data 

(MODIS, chlorophyll a) showing productivity in the surface layer clearly 

identifies Fyllas Banke as the location for the initial spring bloom in March. 

Results from the Nuuk Basic monitoring programme supports this. Productivity 

peaks in April and May and occurs then more widely over the shelf 

break and in neighbouring offshore areas. 

The enhanced primary production retains zooplankton species such as copepods, 

which again are utilized by fish larvae. In general, the slopes of the 

shelf and shelf banks are believed to be important for fish larvae development 

due to high biomass of their copepod prey. For Greenland halibut, the 

main spawning ground is assumed to be located in the western part of the 

assessment area and the eggs and larvae are known to drift through the assessment 

area towards settling areas further north. 

4.9.2 The tidal/subtidal zone 

The tidal and subtidal zone is an important habitat for macrophytes, many 

invertebrates, fish, marine mammals and seabirds. Among others, it provides 

critical spawning and nursery habitat for capelin and lumpsucker. 

Capelin is an ecological key species, important for larger fish species, 

whales, seals, seabirds and human use, while lumpsucker support a smallscale 

commercial fishery on lumpsucker eggs. The benthic macrofauna, such 

as bivalves and sea urchins, play a key role for benthic feeders, such as 

common eider, king eider and long-tailed duck. 

In addition, the tidal/subtidal zone is very important for seabird hunting 

and tourism. 

4.9.3 Demersal fish and benthos 

The sea floor and the adjacent parts of the water column support the commercially 

important fisheries of Greenland halibut, northern shrimp and 

snow crab. For Greenland halibut, the main spawning ground is assumed to 

be located in the western part of the assessment area. 

In addition, sandeels, which are the most important food for many seabirds 

and whales, are distributed in high densities in sandy sediments at the shelf 

banks (e.g. Fyllas Banke). Benthic macrofauna, such as bivalves and sea urchins, 

also plays a central role for benthic feeders at the shelf banks, such as 

king eiders, bearded seal and walrus. The sea floor and adjacent parts of the 

water column are also important for cod, which sustained an important fishery 

in the past and has the potential of becoming commercially important 

again. 

4.9.4 Breeding seabirds 

For the common eider, black-legged kittiwake, Iceland gull, black guillemot, 

common murre, Atlantic puffin and white-tailed eagle the coastal areas and 

the fjords of the assessment area are important as breeding grounds. The 

147

148 

breeding population of common murre and atlantic puffin is small, but significant 

for the Greenland population. 

4.9.5 Non-breeding seabirds 

Large numbers of migrating, wintering and moulting seabirds from the entire 

North Atlantic occur in the assessment. Among the most important species 

are migrating/wintering thick-billed murres, little auks, common eiders, 

king eiders, long-tailed ducks, black-legged kittiwakes, ivory gulls, great 

cormorant, white-tailed eagle and moulting/wintering harlequin ducks. 

Most species are associated with the coastal areas and partly the fjords and 

the shelf, but some species also utilize the western part of the assessment area, 

such as little auk, kittiwake and ivory gull. 

In addition, thick-billed murre, common eider and black-legged kittiwake 

are important as quarry species for the hunters in the assessment area. 

4.9.6 Marine mammals (summer) 

From spring to autumn, the assessment area is an important foraging area 

for several species of cetaceans and seals. Minke whale, fin whale and 

humpback whale feed on krill, capelin and sandeels in shelf and fjord waters. 

Harbour porpoise inhabit shelf waters and feed on small fish such as 

capelin and young cod, as well as squid and krill. Long-finned pilot whale, 

white-beaked dolphin, sperm whale and northern bottlenose whale prey on 

larger fish and squid species on deep-sea waters and continental slopes. 

Harp seals arrive to the area during spring to feed on capelin and sand eel, 

both offshore and in the fjords. Hooded seals are abundant in late summer 

and autumn when migrating between moulting grounds in Southeast 

Greenland and feeding grounds in the Baffin Bay. They feed on large fish 

and squid in deep waters. The assessment area is important for at least one 

group of harbour seals, which are critically endangered in Greenland. 

All the species mentioned above, with exemption of sperm whale, bottlenose 

whale and harbour seal are hunted in Greenland and considered an important 

resource for both economic and cultural reasons. 

4.9.7 Marine mammals (winter) 

Several important species of marine mammals are associated with the northern 

or western part of the assessment area during winter. These include the 

walrus, beluga whale, narwhal, polar bear, hooded seal, bearded seal and 

ringed seal. The main wintering area of these species is located just north 

and/or west of the assessment area; however, in years with an extensive icecoverage 

their distribution overlaps with the assessment area. The bowhead 

whale migrates through the assessment area in January-February towards 

foraging areas (and perhaps mating grounds) in the Disko Bay area. Some of 

the marine mammals that occur during summer may remain during winter 

in ice-free waters of the assessment area. 

To various extents these marine mammals are all hunted in Greenland and 

considered an important resource for both economic and cultural reasons. At 

the same time polar bear, narwhal, beluga whale, bowhead whale and walrus 

are listed as vulnerable, near threatened or threatened in the Greenland 

Red List.

5 Natural resource use 

5.1 Commercial fisheries 

AnnDorte Burmeister, Helle Siegstad, Nanette Hammeken Arboe, Ole Jørgensen, 

Anja Retzel, Rasmus Hedeholm, Rasmus Nygaard, Nikoline Ziemer (GINR) & Daniel 

Clausen (AU) 

Commercial fisheries represent the most important export industry in 

Greenland, underlined by the fact that fishery products accounted for 88% of 

the total Greenlandic export revenue (1.7 billion DKK) in 2009 (Statistics of 

Greenland 2010). The four most important species on a national scale are 

deep-sea shrimp (export revenue in 2009: 1,044 million DKK), Greenland 

halibut (398 million DKK), Atlantic cod (130 million) and snow crab (45 million 

DKK) (Statistics of Greenland 2010). Greenland halibut, shrimp, snow 

crab and cod are the main commercially exploited species within the assessment 

area. Lumpsuckers, wolffish, redfish and salmon are exploited in 

the more coastal regions of the area. 

Shrimp, Pandalus borealis 

Northern shrimp is caught on the bank slopes and in Disko Bay. The fishery 

for shrimp began in inshore areas in 1935 as a small-scale fishery and it developed 

slowly to become a 150,000 tonne fishery. The major part of the 

catch is taken by large modern trawlers, which process the catches onboard. 

The fishery extends from 59°30’N to 74°N in West Greenland waters. The 

annual catch in 2010 was approximately 135,000 tonnes (Hammeken & 

Kingsley 2010) (Fig. 5.1.1). The assessment area holds very important 

grounds for the northern shrimp fisheries and between 50% and 70% of the 

annual catch was taken here from 1990 to the mid2010s. From 2009 the proportion 

of the annual catch taken from the assessment area has declined 

from 50% to 20%. 

Snow crab, Chionoecetes opilio 

Snow crabs are important for communities in the assessment area. Fishing is 

permitted between 60°N and 74°N on the west coast of Greenland. The 

commercial fishery for snow crab started in 1996. Landings peaked in 2002 

at approximately 15,000 tonnes, and the snow crab was at that time the third 

most important species in terms of total export income for Greenland. The 

assessment area is the most important snow crab fishing area and crabs are 

harvested both inshore and offshore, with only a few fjords left unexploited. 

The fishery is mainly situated along the inner and outer edges of the offshore 

banks from 62°N to 67°N, but also Holsteinsborg Dyb and Godthaabs 

Dyb are important fishing sites. Total catches in the assessment area peaked 

at approximately 9,500 tonnes in 2001 (Fig. 5.1.2). In the succeeding years 

catch declined substantially to approximately 1,500 tonnes in 2009 

(Burmeister 2010). 

149


size of northern shrimp catches 

within and nearby the assessment 

area. Catch size calculated 

as the annual average for 2004- 

2009. 

150 

70°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

65°W 

Shrimp fishery (04-09) 

Mean annual catch (tons) 

0 - 100 

101 - 500 

62°N 501 - 1000 

1001 - 3442 


0 100 200 Km 

60°W 

60°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

45°W 

70°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

Snow crab catch (03-05) 

Total catch (kg) 

100 - 500 

501 - 1000 

1001 - 2500 

2501 - 5000 

5001 - 27656 


0 

60°N 

75 150 Km 

60°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

Snow crab catch (06-09) 

Total catch (kg) 

101 - 250 

251 - 500 

501 - 1000 

1001 - 2000 

2001 - 6047 


0 

60°N 

75 150 Km 

60°W 

Figure 5.1.2. Distribution and size of snow crab catches within and nearby the assessment area in 2003-2005 (left) and 2006- 

2009 (right). Catches less than 100 kg are not shown. 

Greenland Halibut, Reinhardtius hippoglossoides 

During the period 2003-2009 annual catches of Greenland halibut in the Davis 

Strait were about 10,000-12,000 tonnes, but increased in 2010 to about 

14,000 tonnes (Jørgensen 2010). Half of the catch ise from Greenland waters 

(Fig. 5.1.3) and constitutes a significant proportion of the total Greenlandic 

catch of Greenland halibut. The other half of the catch is taken in Canadian 

waters close to the Greenland border. In recent years most of the catches in 

Greenland waters use bottom trawl apart from a very small fishery which 

uses longlines (about 20 tonnes). The fishery has been distributed in the 

same way throughout the period (Fig. 5.1.3). 

Greenland halibut inshore exploitation: Greenland halibut in the inshore areas 

of West Greenland are considered to be recruited from the offshore stocks of 

Greenland halibut in the Davis Strait (Riget & Boje 1988). In northern Greenland 

(north of 67°N) a large inshore fishery with total catches up till 25,000 

tonnes (Nygaard et al. 2010) will presumably be affected if the offshore stock 

collapses. In the assessment area inshore fishery is mainly conducted in 

Nuup Kangerlua (the Nuuk/Godthåb fjord) and catches peaked in the early 

1980s at a level of more than 2,000 tonnes per year. The stock collapsed due 

to a high fishing mortality and there was no fishery in the fjord until 2009. In 

2010 landings from Nuup Kangerlua were at a level of 230 tonnes. 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

151


size of the Greenland halibut 

landings from the assessment 

area. Note that different scales 

apply to inshore and offshore 

landings. Inshore catches only 

shown for 2009, offshore by the 

annual average for 2008-2009. 

152 

70°N 

68°N 

66°N 

65°W 

Greenland halibut fishery 

Offshore 2008-2009 

Mean annual catch (tons) 

64°N 0 - 25 

26 - 100 

101 - 200 

201 - 300 

301 - 502 

Inshore 2009 

Annual catch (tons) 

0 - 150 

151 - 250 

251 - 500 

62°N 501 - 750 

751 - 2441 


0 90 180 Km 

60°W 

60°W 

Atlantic cod, Gadus morhua 

In the assessment area cod fishery has been very important historically. The 

West Greenland commercial cod fishery started in 1911 in local fjords 

(Horsted 2000). In the 1920s the offshore fishery developed and total landings 

increased over the next few decades and then peaked in the 1960s with 

annual catches of some 350,000-500,000 tonnes. Spawning stock and sea 

temperature then decreased and in the late 1960s the stock collapsed (Buch 

et al. 1994). Except for a temporary improvement for cod during 1988-90 the 

stock remained at a very low level until early in 2000. Since the beginning of 

this millennium the Atlantic cod stock has improved and large spawning 

cod have been documented in East Greenland in 2007 (ICES 2010b). In 2008 

total catches peaked with 25,000 tonnes, but decreased thereafter (Fig. 5.1.4). 

In 2009 and 2010 the offshore area in West Greenland was closed for cod 

fishery. 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

45°W 

70°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N


size of the Atlantic cod catches in 

the assessment area. Catch size 

calculated as the annual average 

for 2007-2008. Catch statistics for 

the inshore fishery were not 

available. In 2009 and 2010 the 

offshore area in West Greenland 

was closed for cod fishery. 

64°N 

62°N 

Atlantic cod fishery 

2007 - 2008 

Mean catch (tons) 

0.02 - 2.50 

2.51 - 5.00 

5.01 - 10.00 

10.01 - 15.00 

15.01 - 33.06 


60°N 

0 50 100 Km 

55°W 

55°W 

Lumpsucker, Cyclopterus lumpus 

Lumpsucker is caught commercially along the entire Greenland west coast 

(Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, unpubl. data), with total catches 

up to 10,000 tonnes in 2006. In the last decade 65% of total catch was caught 

in the assessment area. The fishery is mainly conducted using gillnets and 

takes place in spring and early summer when the fish move into shallow 

coastal waters to spawn. The roe is the commercial product and the amount 

bought by the local factories in the assessment area varies considerably between 

years. However, since 2002 total catch has increased considerably to 

8,000-10,000 tonnes annually (Fig. 5.1.5a). The same pattern is seen in the assessment 

area where the majority of the catch is landed. 

50°W 

50°W 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°N 

153

Figure 5.1.5. The total annual 

catch of lumpsucker, salmon and 

redfish in West Greenland from 

1996 to 2010. The black line for 

lumpsucker shows the combined 

catch reported for Pamiut, Nuuk, 

Maniitsoq and Sisimiut, i.e. the 

assessment area (data from 

APNN). 

154 

Catch per year (tonnes) 

10000 

8000 

6000 

4000 

2000 

0 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

1000 

800 

600 

400 

200 

0 

Lumpsucker 

Salmon 

Redfish 

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

Capelin, Mallotus villosus 

Capelin is not fished commercially, but caught for local consumption. There 

have, however, been several trial fisheries targeting roe-bearing females, latest 

in 2007, but these have been unsuccessful in finding exploitable resources 

of capelin. In September 2005, an acoustic survey showed considerable concentrations 

of capelin in several Greenland fjords, including two in the assessment 

area (Bergstrøm & Wilhjámsson 2006). Especially the Nuuk fjord 

(64˚N) had high concentrations of capelin, whereas only small capelin concentrations 

were found outside the fjords along the Greenland west coast. 

However, yearly trawl surveys conducted by the Greenland Institute of 

Natural Resources along the coast show that capelin migrate to the shelf area, 

where they presumably spend time from autumn to winter (Friis-Rødel 

& Kanneworff 2002). No other reliable capelin biomass estimates exist and 

the current stock status is unknown.

Salmon, Salmo salar 

The fishery for Atlantic salmon in Greenland waters began in 1960-62 and 

peaked in the early 1970s at a catch level of more than 2,000 tonnes a year 

(Jensen 1990). The fishery was quota regulated from 1972, but due to declining 

stocks NASCO agreed in 1998 that no commercial fishery for salmon 

should be allowed. Since then, the export of salmon from Greenland has 

been banned and the fishery has been limited to the amount that can be sold 

and consumed within Greenland. The coastal fishery constitutes a significant 

income for a few fishermen in each community. In 2010 reported landings 

amounted to 40 tonnes (Fig. 5.1.5b). Approximately half of the total catch of 

salmon in Greenland is caught in the assessment area. 

Redfish, Sebastes mentella and Sebastes marinus 

Landings of redfish in West Greenland were more than 5,000 tonnes per year 

prior to the mid-1980s. Since then landings in West Greenland have been below 

1,000 tonnes per year and less than 100 tonnes in 2010 (Fig. 5.1.5c). Part 

of the catch is taken inshore in the West Greenland fjords. Specific catch statistics 

for the assessment area are not available. 

Wolffish, Anarhichas minor, Anarhichas lupus and Anarhichas denticulatus 

Catch statistics are currently not divided into species, but reported as wolffish 

combined. Wolffish are mainly taken inshore (Nygaard & Jørgensen 

2010), partly as bycatch in the longline or gillnet fishery for Greenland halibut 

and cod and occasionally in crab traps. During the last decade landings 

of wolffish have increased from less than 100 tonnes to about 1,000 tonnes 

per year. Atlantic wolffish survey indices from the EU-German survey are 

very low compared to the mid-1980s. The current advice for Atlantic wolffish 

is ‘No direct fishery’. Spotted wolffish survey indices increased between 

2002 and 2008 to a level above average. 

Iceland scallop, Chlamys islandica 

Iceland scallop is caught in shallow waters in the assessment area where 

currents are strong. Only one fishing boat is active in the fishery and the total 

catch in 2009 was 511 tonnes. 

5.2 Subsistence and recreational fisheries and hunting 

Tenna Kragh Boye, Fernando Ugarte, Malene Simon, Erik W. Born, Lars M. Rasmussen, 

Aqqalu Rosing-Asvid (GINR) & Daniel Clausen (AU) 

Hunting and fishing are an integrated part of Greenlandic culture. Subsistence 

hunting is still of economic importance and recreational hunting and 

fishing activities make a significant contribution to private households. In 

Southwest and South Greenland a lot of the subsistence fishing and hunting 

of marine mammals and seabirds has gradually developed into recreational 

activitys. 

Small-scale fishing and hunting are important activities in the area, both in 

the larger towns, but especially in the smaller settlements where there are 

fewer options for alternative employment. The income generated from 

commercial hunting, i.e., the local sale of meat and skin, is an important 

source of livelihood and as a supplementary food supply for hunters and 

their relations (Rasmussen 2005). Hunting is considered to be a fundamental 

155

Figure 5.2.1. Annual number of 

murres and common eiders hunted 

in West Greenland from 

Paamiut to Sisimiut (the assessment 

area) in the period 1996- 

2008. Unpublished data from 

Piniarneq, Greenland hunting 

statistics, Department of Fisheries, 

Hunting and Agriculture, 

2011. 

156 

element of Greenlandic culture, and products such as skin, bones, antlers, 

teeth, etc. are assets in clothing, jewellery and art. 

A proportion of the catch presented under the commercial fisheries section 

includes subsistence and recreational fisheries. Data on subsistence and recreational 

fisheries in Greenland are not separated. It is however assumed 

that the majority of the Greenlanders participate and benefit from subsistence 

and recreational fisheries. 

Many fish species are utilised on a subsistence basis, the most important are 

spotted wolfish (Anarchichas minor), Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) 

redfish (Sebastes spp.), Atlantic cod (Gadus morrhua), polar cod (Boreogadus 

saida), Greenland cod (Gadus ogac) and Greenland shark (Somniosus 

microcephalus). 

5.2.1 Bird hunting 

Birds have historically played an important role as a supplement to hunting 

marine mammals, caribou and to fishing. The most important hunted bird 

species are thick-billed murre (Uria lomvia), common eider (Somateria mollissima) 

and king eider (Somateria spectabilis), little auk (Alle alle) and black guillemot 

(Cepphus grylle). 

Catches have been reported annually to Piniarneq, the official Greenlandic 

hunting statistics since 1993, and represent the major source of information 

on bird hunting. The data are generally not quality assured, but the reported 

numbers of birds are assumed to represent comparable indices of hunting 

over time. Since 1996 the reported catch of all species has been greatly reduced 

(Fig. 5.2.1 and 5.2.2). Within the assessment area the number of reported 

common eider was reduced to from 33,000 to 11,000 from 2000 to 

2002, when the hunting season was shortened by approximately two 

months, and has stabilised around 11,000 birds annually. 

Since 1996 the thick-billed murre has been the far most important hunted 

seabird, followed by common eider. Specific hunting seasons are established 

by the Department of Fisheries, Hunting and Agriculture and vary between 

species and region. For most species, the main hunting season in the assessment 

area is from 15 October to 1 March (15 March for common eider). Daily 

quotas for the most hunted species are 30 birds for commercial licences and 

5 for recreational licences (Anon 2009). 

Birds shot/year 

160000 

140000 

120000 

100000 

80000 

60000 

40000 

20000 

0 

Murre 

Common eider 

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010

Figure 5.2.2. Annual number of 

king eider, black guillemot and 

little auk hunted in West Greenland 

from Paamiut to Sisimiut (the 

assessment area) in the period 

1996-2008. Unpublished data 

from Piniarneq, Greenland hunting 

statistics, Department of 

Fisheries, Hunting and Agriculture, 

2011. 

Birds shot/year 

12000 

10000 

8000 

6000 

4000 

2000 

0 

5.2.2 Seal hunting 

Seals are important for both part-time and ful-time hunters in the assessment 

area. The skins are purchased and prepared for the international market 

by the tannery in Southwest Greenland, and the meat is eaten locally. In 

the period 2000-2008 more than half a million seal skins were traded in 

Greenland. However, in 2008-2009 the market for sealskins collapsed and it 

is now difficult to sell the skins (Rosing-Asvid 2010). 

Harp seals are caught in large numbers (Fig. 5.2.3), especially during summer 

(Fig. 5.2.4). In winter and early spring most of the West Atlantic harp 

and hooded seals congregate near the whelping areas off Newfoundland. 

However, a small fraction of these seals will stay in West Greenland 

throughout the year. 

Hooded seal can also be caught throughout the year, but most catches are 

made during spring, just prior to and after whelping, when many hooded 

seals are close to the assessment area, or in the fall when post-moult seals 

migrate through the assessment area towards their foraging grounds in Davis 

Strait and Baffin Bay. 

The ringed seal are normally associated with sea ice and some live in or near 

glacier fjords in the assessment area all year. Catches increase during winter 

and spring. Most catches are juvenile seals, of which some are likely to be 

seals that have been ‘pushed’ out of the fjords where adult seals make territories 

when fast ice starts to form. The assessment area is, however, also likely 

to have an influx of seals coming from the Davis Strait pack ice when it 

approaches the coast during winter. 

Catches of bearded seals also increase in late winter–spring (March-April) in 

the northern part of the assessment area when the pack ice comes close to 

the coast. 

Annual catch 

Harp seal: 27-37,000 animals/yr. in recent decades 

Ringed seal:

Figure 5.2.3. Catch statistics for 

seals in the assessment area, 

1996-2008 (data from Piniarneq, 

APNN). 

Figure 5.2.4. The seasonal distribution 

of the seal catches in the 

assessment area in 2008 (data 

from Piniarneq, APNN). 

158 

No. of seals/year 

Ringed-, Hooded- and bearded Seals 

30000 

25000 

20000 

15000 

10000 

5000 

0 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

Harp Seal juvenile 

Harp Seal adult 

Ringed Seal 

5.2.3 Walrus and polar bear 

Hooded Seal 

Bearded Seal 

Haboour Seal 

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

Jan 

Hooded Seal 

Bearded Seal 

Ringed Seal 

Feb 

Mar 

Apr 

Maj 

Jun 

Harp Seal 

Walrus 

Walruses from the West Greenland-Southeast Baffin Island walrus stock are 

hunted in West Greenland mainly during spring until retreat of the pack ice 

westwards and the more or less simultaneous emigration of walruses from 

their West Greenland wintering areas (Born et al. 1994, Born et al. 1995). 

Walruses from this stock are also hunted along Southeast Baffin Island (Nunavut) 

mainly during the period May-November (COSEWIC 2006, Stewart 

2008) – i.e. when generally are they absent from West Greenland. 

Quotas for the West Greenland-Southeast Baffin Island walrus stock in 2007, 

2008 and 2009 were 80, 65, 50 animals (Anon 2006a, b), respectively. However, 

a total of only 43, 28 and 33 walruses were reported landed in West 

Greenland from this stock in 2007, 2008 and 2009 (Ugarte 2011). The Greenland 

quota for the West Greenland-Southeast Baffin Island stock of walrus 

for the period 2010-2012 is 61 landed in each year (Anon 2010b, a). 

During the five-year period 1998/99-2002/03 the reported catch of walruses 

from the same stock on Southeast Baffin Island in the communities Iqaluit, 

Qikiqtarjuaq, Pangnirtung and Kanngiqtugaapik/Clyde River averaged 

27.2/year (sd=11.3, range=15-43, n=5 years). And during the period 

Jul 

Aug 

Sep 

Okt 

Nov 

Dec 

6000 

5000 

4000 

3000 

2000 

1000 

0 

Harp Seal

2003/04-2007/08 the catch averaged 16.0/year (sd=11.8, range:2-34). This is 

a minimum estimate of total removals, because in some years landed catches 

for some of these settlements are not reported. Furthermore, struck-and-lost 

is not included in the reporting (DFO unpubl. data in lit. 2009). 

Polar bear 

Total annual quotas for the harvest from the DS population is 46 for Nunavut, 

2 for Greenland, 6 for Nunatsiavut (Newfoundland and Labrador). 

There is no quota in Nunavik (Quebec). In January of 2006, Greenland established 

a quota system. An annual quota of 2 bears was established for the 

Davis Strait population (Obbard et al. 2010). 

5.2.4 Baleen whales 

Minke whales, fin whales, bowhead whales and humpback whales are hunted 

in West Greenland and annual quotas are set every 5 years by the IWC 

(The International Whaling Commission) (Tab. 5.2.1). The Greenland government 

then divides the quota among the different municipalities. 

Fin whales have been regularly hunted in Greenland since the 1920s and 

minke whales since the 1940s. From 1995 to 2009 the quota for fin whales 

remained stable at 19 whales per year but this quota was seldom used and 

with the introduction of an annual quota of 9 humpback whales for West 

Greenland in the years 2010-2012, the fin whale quota was correspondingly 

reduced to 10 whales per year. The quota for minke whales for West Greenland 

is 178 whales per year, with the possibility of transferring up to 15 animals 

from one year to the next (IWC 2010). 

Apart from a period between 1987 and 2009, humpback whales have been 

hunted in Greenland for centuries (Fabricius 1780). Six out of the nine 

humpback whales from the quota of 2010 and 2011 can be taken within, or 

close to, the assessment area (APNN 2011b). Whale watching focusing on 

humpback whales is an activity that has grown considerably in Greenland 

during the last years and is practised both by commercial companies and by 

locals from private boats (Boye et al. 2010). To avoid conflicts of interest between 

whaling and whale watching, whalers and tour operators in the Municipality 

of Sermersooq have agreed to avoid overlap of their activities in 

time and space (Bergstrom 2010). To minimise disturbance to humpback 

whales, a voluntary code of conduct for whale watching has been suggested 

by the Greenland Tourism and Business Council (Boye et al. 2010, Boye et al. 

2011) 

Bowhead whales have been hunted since the time the Thule Inuit settled in 

Greenland about 1,000 years ago (Jensen et al. 2008a). European and North 

American whalers decimated the population in the 17 th -19 th centuries and by 

the start of the 20 th century the species had become rare in Greenland. In 

1927 the species was protected. The population has now recovered to the extent 

that a quota of two animals per year for the period 2008-2012 has been 

approved by the IWC. The first bowhead whales were caught in 2009. Bowhead 

whales are caught in Disko Bay, north of the assessment area. 

159

Table 5.2.1. 2011 quotas for the four species of baleen whales and two species of tooth whales caught in West Greenland 

waters (APNN 2011b). 

Species West Greenland quota Quota in the 

Catch in the 

assessment area assessment area in 2010 

Minke whale 

(Balaenoptera acutorostrata) 

160 

185 (178 + 7 transferred 

from 2010) 

Open (12 for collective hunt) 83 

Fin whale (Balaenoptera physalus) 10 Open 3 

Humpback whale 

(Megaptera novaeangliae) 

9 6 6 

Bowhead whale (Balaena mysticetus) 2 0 0 

Narwhal (Monodon monoceros) 310 6 NA 

Beluga whale (Delphinapterus leucas) 310 41 NA 

Most minke whales are hunted from boats equipped with harpoon cannons, 

loaded with explosive penthrite grenades, but a limited number of minke 

whales can be taken as ‘collective hunt’ from dinghies (Anon 2010c). In 2010, 

the total catch of minke whales reported in zones within the assessment area 

was 83 individuals: 21 minke whales for the Sisimiut area, 37 for Maniitsoq, 

11 for Nuuk and 14 for Pamiut (APNN, unpubl. data). Most minke whale 

catches within the assessment area (Fig. 5.2.5) are females due to a sexual 

segregation where females tend to migrate further north than males to their 

summer feeding grounds, resulting in more females than males in West 

Greenland (Laidre et al., 2009). 

Fin whales, bowhead whales and humpback whales can only be hunted using 

harpoon cannons and explosive penthrite grenades (Anon 2010c). Due to 

a lack of boats equipped with harpoon cannons in the northernmost parts of 

West Greenland, fin whales and humpback whales are normally taken in 

Disko bay or further south (as mentioned above, bowhead whales are hunted 

only in Disko Bay). In 2010, three fin whales were caught within the assessment 

area and two were hunted just south of Disko Island in 

Qeqertarsuaq and Ilulissat, north of the assessment area. Of the quota of 

nine humpback whales for each of the years 2010 and 2011, three whales 

were given to the municipality of Qeqqata and three to Sermersooq, both 

within or close to the assessment area. Two humpback whales were given to 

the municipality of Qaasuisup, north from the assessment area and one to 

Kujalleq, south of the assessment area. Figure 5.2.5 shows the positions of fin 

whales caught in 1988-2007 and humpback whales caught in 2010. In addition 

to the hunt, up to approximately five humpback whales are unintentionally 

caught in fishing gear every year in Greenland.

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 

60°W 

Minke whale catches (91-10) 

Year 

1991 - 1995 

1996 - 2000 

2001 - 2005 

2006 - 2010 


0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

Humpback whale catches 

Year 

2010 


60°N 0 75 150 Km 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

63°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 

60°W 

Fin whale catches (91-10) 

Year 

1991 - 1995 

1996 - 2000 

2001 - 2005 

2006 - 2010 


0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

60°W 

Beluga whale catches 

Year 

2007 

2008 

2009 

2010 


60°N 0 75 150 Km 

Figure 5.2.5. Minke whale, humpback whale, beluga whale and fin whale catches in West Greenland within varying time periods. 

For belugas, the figure shows only 7 % of the reported catch. The remaining dataset has not yet been geo-referenced (data 

from APNN). 

55°W 

54°W 

55°W 

54°W 

50°W 

50°W 

48°W 

66°N 

63°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

161

162 

5.2.5 Toothed whales 

Catches of narwhals and belugas are amongst the most important for the 

communities of Northwest Greenland (Heide-Jørgensen 1994). Sisimiut and 

Maniitsoq, in the northern part of the assessment area, are the southernmost 

places where narwhals and belugas are regularly caught. Large catches over 

several decades caused an apparent decline in the population sizes of the 

two species. In 2004, quotas were introduced by the Government of Greenland. 

The annual quotas are 310 belugas and 310 narwhals per year (Tab. 

5.2.1). With these quotas there is a 70% chance that the population sizes of 

both species will increase (NAMMCO 2010). For Sisimiut, the quotas for 

2011-2012 include two narwhals and 26 belugas per year. For the same period, 

quotas for Maniitsoq are two narwhals and ten belugas per year (APNN 

2011a). Narwhal and beluga are the only toothed whales whose hunt is regulated 

by quotas in Greenland (Anon 2011b). Figure 5.2.5 shows the positions 

of beluga catches from 2006-2010. 

Harbour porpoise, pilot whales and, to some extent, white beaked dolphins, 

killer whales and perhaps bottlenose whales are also hunted. Catch of these 

species is unregulated, but there is a voluntary reporting system that has included 

harbour porpoises since 1993. Pilot whales and killer whales were included 

in the reporting system in 1996, and white beaked dolphins and bottlenose 

whales were added in 2003. The data is entered into a large database 

administrated by the Ministry of Fisheries, Hunting and Agriculture. The 

data presented below comes from this database. A partial validation of killer 

whale data showed that there are human mistakes in the reporting. 

In the period from 1993-2008 an average of 2,271 harbour porpoises were 

taken annually. Of the 34,064 catches reported from 1993-2008 in West 

Greenland, 30,443 harbour porpoises (i.e. 89%) were taken within, or close to 

the assessment area (i.e. between Pamiut and Sisimiut) (Fig. 5.2.6a). 

Due to their unpredictable occurrence, pilot whales, white beaked dolphins 

and killer whales are caught opportunistically. Annual catches of pilot 

whales in West Greenland vary between 0 and 300 and from 1996-2008 a total 

of 2,154 pilot whales have been caught in West Greenland. Most pilot 

whales are caught south of Disko Bay and approximately half have been 

caught within the assessment area (Fig. 5.2.6b). 

White-beaked dolphins and white-sided dolphin are not separated in the reporting 

system. In Greenlandic both species have the same name. However, 

we can assume that the vast majority of dolphin catches are indeed whitebeaked 

dolphins, as white-sided dolphins have a more southern distribution. 

On average, 40 dolphins have been caught annually in the period from 

2003-2008 (Fig. 5.2.6c). Out of 238 dolphins reported caught in West Greenland 

from 2003-2008, 153 (i.e. 64%) were caught in the assessment area. 

Killer whales are hunted partly for human subsistence and partly to feed 

sledge dogs. As they are considered as competitors for seal and whale hunters, 

this is an additional reason for the hunting of killer whales. From 1996- 

2008 a total of 84 killer whales have been caught in West Greenland and the 

annual average catch for the entire period was 13, ranging between 0 and 26 

killer whales per year (Fig. 5.2.6d). The killer whales have been caught irregularly 

along the entire West coast from Upernavik in the north to 

Nanortalik in the south, with 27% of the catches (i.e. 23 animals) taken within 

the assessment area.

Figure 5.2.6. The West Greenland 

catch (green bars) of harbour 

porpoise, pilot whale, white 

beaked dolphin and killer whale. 

The black line shows the combined 

catch reported for Pamiut, 

Nuuk, Maniitsoq and Sisimiut, i.e. 

the assessment area (data from 

APNN). 

Catch per year (tonnes) 

4000 

3000 

2000 

1000 

0 

30 

20 

10 

0 

100 

80 

60 

40 

20 

0 

15 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Harbour porpoise 

Pilot whale 

White-beaked dolphin / white-sided dolphin 

Killer whale 

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 

163

164 

Bottlenose whales are not eaten in Greenland because their blubber causes 

diarrhea in humans as well as dogs. Nevertheless, a few catches have been 

reported. It is possible that these reports are mostly mistakes, but until they 

have been validated we can mention that catches reported from 2006, 2007 

and 2008 were two, nine and 21 bottlenose whales, respectively. With the 

exemption of three, all reports are from the assessment area. 

5.3 Tourism 

Michael Dünweber & David Boertmann (AU) 

The tourist industry is one of three major sectors within the Greenland economy, 

and the industry is increasing greatly in importance in the assessment 

area, both nationally and locally. The most important asset for the tourist industry 

is the unspoilt, authentic and pristine nature. There are no statistics 

on the number of tourists and their regional distribution in Greenland available, 

but hotels report the number of guests they have accommodated and 

how many ‘bed nights’ they have sold. Overall figures for Greenland as a 

whole in 2008 were approximately 82,000 guests and approximately 250,000 

‘bed nights’ (Statistics of Greenland 2010). In the region of mid-Greenland 

which includes the capital Nuuk, approximately 117,000 bed nights. By far 

the major part of bed nights were in the assessment area and only 5-10% in 

Northwest and East Greenland (= former municipalities of Qaanaaq, Upernavik, 

Uummannaq, Scoresbysund and Tasiilaq). 

In addition, cruise ships bring an increasing number of tourists to Greenland. 

Cruise ships increased from 37 in 2007 to 42 in 2008, where the ship 

deployment also increased from 148 to 165 in the same period (Statistics of 

Greenland 2010). According to the Danish Naval Authorities in Greenland, 

the number of visitors from cruise ships increased from 23,000 in 2006 to 

55,000 in 2007 (Fig. 5.3.1). The National Strategy of Tourism 2008-2010 plans 

a 10% increase per year in the number of cruise tourists (Erhvervsdirektoratet 

2007). The cruise ships focus on the coastal zone and they often 

visit very remote areas that are otherwise almost inaccessible, and seabirds 

and marine mammals are among the highlights on these trips. 

A number of tourists also go to Greenland for outdoor leisure activities 

(mountaineering, kayaking, etc.) or scientific expeditions (natural history) 

(Fig. 5.3.2). 

5.3.1 Tourist activities 

Toursim activities are centred in the two main towns of the assessment area, 

Nuuk and Sisimiut, where there is accommodation and tourist operators are 

based. The season starts in early spring when there are opportunities for dog 

sledding (Sisimiut) on land, but the main season is summer (July-August) 

when it is possible to sail from the towns to attractions such as archeological 

sites, bird cliffs, whale habitats, glaciers, small settlements, hiking areas and 

areas with scenic views. In Nuuk the following activities take place 

(www.greenland.com): 

• Whale watch cruises – summer and autumn 

• Fishing and hunting, including boat trips with local hunters – mainly in 

the summer season

Figure 5.3.1. The number of 

cruise ships (upper graph) and 

the number of passengers (lower 

graph) in Greenland, 1994–2007. 

There is no data on the cruise 

ship activity available for the 

assessment area, but the trends 

ships 

are similar (Greenland Tourism, 

of 

pers. comm.). No. 

Figure 5.3.2. The number of 

expeditions in Greenland by year. 

Data provided by the Danish 

Polar Centre (DPC). It is not 

possible to filter out the expeditions 

visiting the assessment 

area. 

• Kayaking in June to August. Kayakers explore the coastal zone and 

bring equipment and provisions of their own 

• Cruise ships, mainly in August and September. Visitors in Nuuk mainly 

explore the city; sightseeing, museums, art exhibitions and restaurants 

• Skiing (cross country and alpine), mainly February to April 

• Hiking, climbing and mountaineering. Mainly in the spring and summer 

season. 

Much of the tourist activity within the assessment area takes place in the 

coastal zone and extensive oil exposure in this area will have serious impact 

on local tourist activity and the tourist industry. 

No. of passengers 

No. of expeditions 

35 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

20.000 

15.000 

10.000 

5.000 

0 

100 

90 

80 

70 

60 

50 

40 

30 

20 

10 

0 

1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 

Sport Scientific 

2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 

165

Figure 6.1.1. Areas within or 

near the assessment area protected 

according the Greenland 

Nature Protection Law or designated 

as Important Bird Areas 

(IBAs) or Ramsar sites. 

166 

6 Protected areas and threatened species 

David Boertmann & Daniel Clausen(AU) 

6.1 International nature protection conventions 

According to the Convention on Wetlands (the Ramsar Convention, 

http://www.ramsar.org), Greenland has designated eleven areas to be included 

in the Ramsar list of Wetlands of International Importance (Ramsar 

sites). These areas are to be conserved as wetlands and should be incorporated 

in the national conservation legislation; however, only one of the 

Greenland Ramsar sites has so far been protected legally. A single Ramsar 

site is situated within the assessment area, and that is the fjord Ikkattok and 

adjacent archipelagoes near Paamiut (Egevang & Boertmann 2001) - see fig. 

6.1.1. 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°W 

60°W 

Protected areas 

Ramsar Area 

Nature Protection Area 

Important Bird Area 

0 75 150 Km 

60°N 

55°W 

55°W 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

6.2 National nature protection legislation 

Only three areas protected according to the Greenland nature protection legislation 

are located within the assessment area. However, two of these are 

inland sites and will not be affected by offshore oil activities. The third site is 

the island of Akilia near Nuuk (Order no. 19 of November 1, 1998), which is 

close to the outer coast and protected due to geological interest (Fig. 6.1.1). 

No sites within the assessment area are protected as seabird breeding sanctuaries 

according to the Bird Protection Executive Order (No. 8 of March 2, 

2009). But this order also states, that in general, all seabird breeding colonies 

are protected from disturbing activities (cf. the maps showing the seabird 

breeding colonies within the assessment area (Fig. 4.7.1 and 4.7.2). According 

to the Mineral Extraction Law, a number of areas are designated as ‘important 

to wildlife’ and mineral (and hydrocarbon) exploration activities are 

regulated in order to protect wildlife. There are several of these areas important 

to wildlife within the assessment area and they also include the most 

important seabird breeding colonies. The areas important to wildlife can be 

found on this link: http://dmugisweb.dmu.dk/rdimportantareas/. 

6.3 Threatened species 

Greenland has red-listed (designated according to risk of extinction) six species 

of mammals, thirteen species of birds and one species of fish (Tab. 6.3.1) 

which may occur in the assessment area (Boertmann 2007), although some 

are rare. 

A few species have been categorised as ‘Data Deficient’ (DD) in the Greenland 

red list and they may become red-listed when additional information is 

available. These are bearded seal, harbour porpoise, blue whale and sei 

whale. Bottlenose whales, listed as ‘not applicable’ in the Greenland Red List 

and ‘Data Deficient’ in the IUCN global Red List may also change status 

when additional information is available. 

Table 6.3.1. Species and included in the national red list of Greenland (Boertmann 2007). 

Species Red list category 

Harbour seal Critically endangered (CR) 

Walrus Endangered (EN) 

Bowhead whale Near threatened (NT) 

Beluga whale Critically endangered (CR) 

Narwhal Critically endangered (CR) 

Great northern diver Near threatened (NT) 

Greenland white-fronted goose Endangered (EN) 

Common eider Vulnerable (VU) 

Harlequin duck Near threatened (NT) 

Gyr falcon Vulnerable (VU) 

White-tailed eagle Near threatened (NT) 

Sabines gull Near threatened (NT) 

Black-legged kittiwake Vulnerable (VU) 

Ivory gull Vulnerable (VU) 

Arctic tern Near threatened (NT) 

Thick-billed murre Vulnerable (VU) 

Common murre Endangered (EN) 

Atlantic puffin Near threatened (NT) 

Atlantic salmon* Vulnerable (VU) 

* local stock spawning in a single river in Godthåbsfjord. 

167

168 

National responsibility species constitute a significant part (20%) of the 

global population in Greenland, why their global survival are dependent on 

a favourable conservation status in Greenland. Endemic species or subspecies 

are also of national responsibility as the total global population is found 

within Greenland. Those occurring in the assessment area are listed in Table 

6.3.2. 

Table 6.3.2. Species of national responsibility and endemic species (subspecies) occurring 


National responsibility species 

Narwhal 

Walrus 

Polar bear 

Light-bellied brent goose 

Greenland white-fronted goose (endemic subspecies) 

Brent goose 

Mallard (endemic subspecies) 

Common eider 

White-tailed eagle (endemic subspecies) 

Iceland Gull (endemic subspecies) 

Black guillemot 

Little auk 

Species with isolated population in Greenland (endemics not included) 

Great cormorant 

Red-breasted merganser 

Harlequin duck 

Harbour seal 

Harbour porpoise 

Atlantic salmon (local spawning stock) 

The International Union of Nature Conservation (IUCN 2010)) lists the species, 

which are globally threatened. See Table 6.3.3 for the species occurring 

within the assessment area. 

Table 6.3.3. Species occurring in the assessment area and listed as globally threatened 

(IUCN 2010). 

Species Redlist category 

Ivory gull Near Threatened (NT) 

Polar bear Vulnerable (VU) 

Fin whale Endangered (EN) 

Blue whale Endangered (EN) 

Sperm whale Vulnerable (EN) 

Narwhal Near Threatened (NT) 

Beluga whale Near Threatened (NT) 

6.4 NGO designated areas 

The international bird protection organisation BirdLife International has designated 

a number of Important Bird Areas (IBAs) in Greenland (Heath & 

Evans 2000), of which eight are located within the assessment area (Fig. 

6.1.1). These areas are designated using a large set of criteria, for example, 

that at least 1% of a bird population should occur in the area. For further in-

formation see the IBA website (http://www.birdlife.org/ action/science/sites/index.html). 

Some of the IBAs are included in or protected 

by the national regulations for example as seabird breeding sanctuaries, 

but many are without protection or activity regulations. 

169

170 

7 Contaminants, background levels and effects 

Doris Schiedek (AU) 

Knowledge on background levels of contaminants in areas where hydrocarbon 

exploration and exploitation are foreseen is important, since it serves as 

a baseline for monitoring and assessment of potential future contamination 

of the environment caused by these activities. The occurrence of contaminants 

in the marine environment and their potential impacts on biota has 

been studied in Greenland over the years in various regions and with different 

purposes. An overview is given in Boertmann et al. (2009). In the following, 

present knowledge is summarised with focus on studies with relevance 

for the Davis Strait assessment area. 

Baseline data on lead, cadmium, mercury and selenium levels in molluscs, 

crustaceans, fish, seabirds, seals, walruses, whales and polar bears have been 

compiled for different geographical regions, including West, Northwest and 

Central West Greenland (Dietz et al. 1996). Only data for animals not affected 

by local pollution sources, i.e. former mine sites are included. The overall 

conclusion was that lead levels in marine organisms from Greenland were 

low, whereas cadmium, mercury and selenium levels were high, in some 

cases exceeding Danish food standard limits. No clear conclusions could be 

drawn in relation to geographical differences concerning lead, mercury and 

selenium concentrations. In general, cadmium levels were higher in biota 

from Northwest Greenland compared with southern areas. 

7.1 AMAP Monitoring Activities 

With 1991 as baseline, the Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme 

(AMAP) was established to monitor identified pollution risks and their impacts 

on Arctic ecosystems. The Arctic is a region with almost no industry or 

agriculture. Most of the persistent organic pollutants (POPs) and a substantial 

number of the metals (e.g. mercury) found in the Arctic environment are 

of anthropogenic origin. The POPs, mercury and other substances have 

reached the Arctic as a result of long-range transport by air and via oceans 

and rivers (AMAP 2004). Once in the Arctic, contaminants can be taken up 

in the lipid rich Arctic marine food web. In general, the level of mercury has 

increased in the Arctic, with implications for the health of humans and wildlife. 

There is also some evidence that the Arctic is a ‘sink’ for global atmospheric 

mercury (Outridge et al. 2008). 

As part of AMAP activities a biological time trend programme was set up in 

Greenland with focus on a suite of POPs, including PCBs (Polychlorinated 

Biphenyls) and different trace metals, e.g. cadmium (Cd), mercury (Hg), selenium 

(Se). A detailed overview of contaminant levels and temporal trends 

in the monitored species is given by Schiedek in (Boertmann & Mosbech 

2011), which included results from the latest AMAP assessment in 2009 

(Muir & de Wit 2010). 

In general it can be stated with regard to POPs that the AMAP assessments 

have revealed levels of organochlorines in Arctic biota generally to be highest 

in marine organisms belonging to the top trophic level (e.g., great skuas,

glaucous gulls, great black-backed gulls, killer whales, pilot whales, Arctic 

fox, and polar bears). This is particularly true in relation to biomagnification 

of PCBs and DDT. AMAP activities have also shown a decrease in the levels 

of some POPs (e.g. PCBs and DDT), resulting from introduction of bans and 

restrictions relating to their use in other parts of the world (AMAP 2004, 

Muir & de Wit 2010). At the same time, however, use of new persistent pollutants, 

currently produced in large quantities, is on the increase (AMAP 

2004, Muir & de Wit 2010). These substances have also been detected in animals 

from Greenland; such as the brominated flame retardants hexabromocyclododecane 

(HBCD) or tetrabromobisphenol (TBBPA), chemicals which 

are produced in high volumes. In recent years their presence has been reported 

in sediment and biota from the marine environment (Frederiksen et 

al. 2007), with concentrations of HBCDs in animals from West Greenland 

generally being lower than in the same species from East Greenland. The 

same effect has previously been described for other halogenated compounds 

such as polybrominated diphenyl ethers (PBDEs) (Vorkamp et al. 2007). 

Another, more localised source of pollution is mining activity, e.g. the olivine 

mine at Seqi in Niaqunngunaq (Fiskefjord) north of Nuuk. The nearest 

settlement is Atammik, at the inlet of the fjord. The mine was in operation 

between 2005 and 2010. Since 2004, environmental monitoring has been 

conducted every year in order to assess any impact from mining. During operation 

increased levels of some elements, particularly chromium and nickel, 

were measured in lichens, blue mussels and seaweed. Generation and 

spread of metal-contaminated dust from the roads and the ore-crushing facility 

was considered the main source of this contamination. Since closure of 

the mine in 2010, the environmental impact has decreased and is presently 

considered as being insignificant for the Niaquungunaq fjord system (Søndergaard 

& Asmund 2011). 

7.1.1 Tributyltin (TBT) 

The antifouling agent, tributyltin (TBT) can be found in many coastal waters 

in both industrial and developing countries with the highest levels in harbours 

and shipping lanes (Sousa et al. 2009). In remote areas such as the Arctic 

environment, TBT levels are usually low, except close to harbours, e. g. 

Sisimiut (Villumsen & Ottosen 2006) and shipping lanes (Strand & Asmund 

2003, AMAP 2004, Berge et al. 2004). The presence of TBT residues in harbour 

porpoises from Greenland documents that organotin compounds have 

also spread to the Arctic region, though the concentrations are rather low 

(Jacobsen & Asmund 2000, Strand et al. 2005). 

7.1.2 Petroleum hydrocarbons and Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons 

(PAH) 

Petroleum hydrocarbons represent several hundred chemical compounds 

originating from crude oil e.g. gasoline, kerosene, and diesel fuel. Of primary 

interest for assessment of the environmental impacts are the aromatic hydrocarbons 

(i.e., benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes). Another important 

group is the polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs), which originate 

from two main sources: combustion (pyrogenic) and crude oil (petrogenic). 

PAHs represent the most toxic fraction of oil and are released to the 

environment through oil spills and discharge of produced water (see also 

chapter 10 and 11). Twentythree PAHs are included on the lists of priority 

171

Figure 7.1.1. Polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbon (PAH) concentrations 

(µg kg-1 dry mass) in surface 

sediments (usually in the 0-1 

cm) in western Greenland. Coloured 

bars indicate PAH concentrations 

and sampling carried out 

by different companies/institutions. 

Red bars indicate 

sampling by NERI (Aarhus University, 

Denmark) and blue bars 

by Capricorn (Cairn, Edinburgh). 

Note: Data is based on 23 PAH 

values which are included in the 

United States Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) compounds 

as priority pollutants. 

172 

chemical contaminants by the World Health Organization and the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA). 

Levels of petroleum hydrocarbons (incl. PAHs) are generally low in the Arctic 

marine environment and often close to background concentrations, except 

in areas with anthropogenic impact such as harbours. Presently, the majority 

of petroleum hydrocarbons in the Arctic originate from natural 

sources such as seeps (Skjoldal et al. 2007). From the studies performed so 

far in Greenland, including the assessment area, on PAH levels in biota and 

sediment (including sediments from offshore areas, municipal waste 

dumpsites and sites with no known local pollution sources), levels of petroleum 

compounds in the Greenland environment appear to be relatively low 

and are regarded as background concentrations (Fig. 7.1.1, PAH concentrations 

in West Greenland). 

The higher PAH concentrations in some areas off the coast of the Nuussuaq 

Peninsula (Fig. 7.1.1) could probably be attributed to the Marrat oil seep, 

which has been studied some years ago (Mosbech et al. 2007). 

76°N 

74°N 

72°N 

70°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

90°W 

70°W 

85°W 

80°W 

65°W 

75°W 

70°W 

65°W 

PAH concentration in 

surface sediments (µg/kg dry mass) 

62°N 

60°N 

500 

1.000 

0 150 300 Km 

1.500 

60°W 

60°W 

55°W 

50°W 

55°W 

45°W 

40°W 

50°W 

35°W 

30°W 

25°W 

45°W 

76°N 

74°N 

72°N 

70°N 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

60°N

7.2 Conclusions on contaminant levels 

In general, the AMAP studies have revealed that levels of organochlorines in 

Arctic biota are highest in the marine organisms belonging to the top trophic 

level (e.g. whales). This is particularly true in relation to bio-magnification of 

PCBs and DDT. AMAP activities have also shown a decrease in the levels of 

some POPs (e.g. PCBs and DDT), resulting from introduction of bans and restrictions 

relating to their use in other parts of the world (AMAP 2004, Muir 

& de Wit 2010). At the same time, however, levels of new persistent pollutants, 

such as brominated flame retardants, are on the increase (AMAP 2004, 

Muir & de Wit 2010), also in animals from Greenland. Levels of petroleum 

compounds, including PAHs, are relatively low in the Greenland environment 

and are regarded as background concentrations. 

The short overview given in this section documents that our present 

knowledge on contaminant levels in marine organisms from West Greenland 

and the assessment area is still limited. Further studies are needed to 

understand better whether and to what degree the biota in the assessment 

area are already impacted by contaminants, but also to serve as a baseline 

for future monitoring and assessments. In this respect it is important to learn 

more about the relationship between contaminant loads and potential biological 

impact, including sublethal health effects or impairments. 

7.3 Biological effects 

The research and monitoring activities described in the previous section 

clearly indicate the presence of different kinds of contaminants (e.g. POPs, 

heavy metals) in biota from Greenland. Regional differences in contaminant 

level have been found as well as differences between species, with highest 

concentrations apparent in top predators (e.g. polar bear, seals). However, 

contaminant levels are often still lower than in biota from more temperate 

regions, e.g. the North Sea or Baltic Sea. The question arises of whether the 

levels found in the Arctic are sufficiently high to cause biological effects and 

what the threshold level of impact might be. 

Threshold levels have been estimated for various contaminants in a range of 

species both under laboratory conditions and in the field in European waters. 

These studies have clearly indicated that organisms are affected by contaminants 

and that their physiological responses depend on the duration 

and extent of exposure. The effects observed range from enzyme inhibition 

and changes in cellular processes, to immuno-suppression, neurotoxic and 

genotoxic effects up to reproduction impairment or histopathology alterations 

as endpoint of the pollutant impact. Differences in response have been 

demontrated among species and regions (Van der Oost et al. 2003, Lehtonen 

et al. 2006, Picado et al. 2007). Toxicity tests have also widely been used in 

temperate regions to relate environmental concentrations to biological effects, 

but very few tests have been published on polar species. 

Species living in the Arctic and Sub-Arctic have very specific life strategies 

and population dynamics as a result of adaptation to the harsh environment. 

Moreover, their fat content and seasonal turnover can differ when compared 

to more temperate species (AMAP 2004). The lower temperatures in Greenlandic 

waters are also likely to have an impact on the toxicity of contaminants. 

173

174 

Limited data are available to determine whether species adapted to cold are 

more (or less) sensitive to contaminants than temperate species and thereby 

whether the relationships between contaminant concentrations and impacts 

derived from temperate species can be applied to the sub and high Arctic 

environment. As part of the AMAP assessment in 2009, the most recent studies 

have been reviewed and summarised in regard to biological effects and 

how they relate to organohalogen contaminant (OHC) exposure (Letcher et 

al. 2010). First attempts have been made to assess known tissue/body compartment 

concentration data in the context of possible threshold levels on 

top trophic level species, including seabirds (e.g. glaucous gull), polar bears 

and Arctic char. 

There was only little evidence that OHCs are having a widespread effect on 

the health of Arctic organisms. However, on a smaller scale, effects have 

been documented. Based on the ‘weight of evidence’ found in different studies 

performed on Arctic and Sub-Arctic wildlife and fish, several key species 

and populations have been identified (Letcher et al. 2010). Among these are 

East Greenland polar bear and ringed seal, Greenland shark from the Baffin 

Bay/David Strait and a few populations of freshwater Arctic char. 

Pollution effects have also been investigated on polar bears (Ursus maritimus) 

in more detail, since this species exhibits the highest levels of certain contaminants 

(e.g. organochlorines, PBDEs, PFCs or mercury) in the Arctic, in 

particular the populations from East Greenland and Svalbard (Norway). Effects 

on polar bear health caused by the complex, biomagnified mixture of 

these substances are summarised and assessed by Sonne (2010). The review 

shows that hormone and vitamin concentrations, liver, kidney and thyroid 

gland morphology as well as reproductive and immune systems of polar 

bears are likely to be influenced by contaminant exposure. 

7.3.1 Polyaromatic Hydrocarbons (PAH) and possible effects on biota 

At present, PAH levels are relatively low in Greenland biota; although, as 

described in the previous section, point sources in harbour areas are found. 

With intensification of human activities, e.g. in relation to oil exploration, 

however, this may change and reliable environmental monitoring tools are 

required to identify any potential impact on the biota. 

PAHs are taken up by marine organisms directly from the water (via the 

body surface or gills) or through the diet. Many studies have indicated that 

PAHs are more or less metabolised by invertebrates and generally efficiently 

metabolised by vertebrates such as fish (Hylland et al. 2006). Therefore, and 

in contrast to most persistent organic pollutants, PAHs are not biomagnified 

in the marine food web. Dietary exposure to PAHs may, however, be high in 

species that preferentially feed on organisms with low ability to metabolise 

PAHs, such as bivalves (Peterson et al. 2003). At the other end of the food 

chain, filter-feeding zooplankton can be exposed to high levels through filtering 

of oil droplets containing PAHs from the surrounding water. 

The effects of PAHs on organisms are extensive and occur on various levels, 

including biochemical and physiological and/or genotoxic (Hylland et al. 

2006). The responses and tolerance to PAHs can vary considerably in organisms, 

depending on the geographical range of the species but also on the 

particular PAH mixture. PAHs are a large group of diverse substances, ranging 

from two-ring naphthalenes and naphthalene derivates to complex ring

structures containing up to 10 rings. Effects in relation to PAH exposure 

have also been found at the population level, possibly reflecting the preexposure 

history and/or heritable, genetic changes in populations chronically 

exposed to PAHs. 

PAHs are also major contributors to the toxicity of produced water released 

during oil and gas production. Produced water is a complex mixture and 

contains numerous toxic compounds, such as dispersed oil, metals, alkylphenols 

(APs), and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs). Composition 

varies between wells, among other reasons due to the different chemicals 

added during the oil production process. Possible effects on biota 

caused by PAHs are discussed in more details in chapters 10 and 11. In general, 

it can be stated that exposure to PAHs causes effects at different biological 

levels and that the thresholds can differ according to species. 

To be able to assess better the potential risk for Arctic and sub-Arctic biota 

and their environment due to petroleum related contamination, e.g. oil 

spills, more integrated studies are necessary. Knowledge concerning the 

sensitivity of key species in the assessment area and their responses to oil or 

PAH exposure is also in need of improvement. 

Studies performed in Norway on polar cod and other typical Artic-sub-Artic 

species have documented that application of a range of biomarkers should 

be considered when assessing biological effects. Moreover, assessment criteria 

have to be established allowing any unacceptable impact to be assessed. 

Such criteria are based on ecotoxicological tests covering the sensitivity 

range of relevant species at different trophic levels, e.g. OSPAR Environmental 

Assessment Criteria (EAC). Toxicological tests with relevant species from 

the Davis Strait are not available for establishing such criteria. Knowledge 

concerning species’ sensitivity and assessment criteria as well as an adequate 

monitoring strategy need to be available before any increase in drilling 

activity, e.g. during oil exploration or production, commences in West 

Greenland. 

175

176 

8 Impacts of climate change 

Doris Schiedek, Morten Frederiksen, Michael Dünweber, (AU) & Martin Blicher 

(GINR) 

8.1 General context 

One of the main findings of the AMAP assessment concerning the impacts of 

climate change on Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA) 

has been that the period 2005-2010 was the warmest ever recorded in the 

Arctic environment (AMAP 2011). Since 1980 the increase in annual average 

temperature has been twice as high in the Arctic region as in other parts of 

the world. Changes in weather patterns and ocean currents have been observed, 

including higher inflows of warm water entering the Arctic Ocean 

from the Pacific. 

Average autumn-winter temperatures are projected to increase by 3 to 6°C 

by 2080, even when using scenarios with lower greenhouse gas emissions 

than those recorded in the past ten years. It has also been predicted that sea 

ice thickness and summer sea ice extent will continue to decline, though 

with considerable variation from year to year. A nearly ice-free summer is 

now considered likely for the Arctic Ocean by the middle of the century 

(AMAP 2011). 

Also in Greenland, 2010, for example, was marked by record high air temperatures, 

ice loss through melting, and marine-terminating glacier area loss. 

Summer seasonal average (June-August) air temperatures around Greenland 

were 0.6 to 2.4°C above the 1971-2000 baseline and were highest in the 

west. A combination of a warm and dry 2009-2010 winter and the very 

warm summer resulted in the highest melt rate since at least 1958, and an 

area and duration of ice sheet melting that was above that in any previous 

year on record since at least 1978. There is now clear evidence that the ice area 

loss rate of the past decade (on average 120 km 2 /year) is greater than it 

was before 2000 (Box et al. 2010). 

Ongoing and future warming has an impact on marine ecosystems in Greenland 

in many ways. An increase in water temperature has a direct influence 

on organisms and their metabolism, growth and reproduction. Depending 

on the acclimation capacity of local species, changes in distribution patterns 

and species diversity are to be expected, with severe consequences for the 

composition of biological communities and their productivity and influencing 

in turn ecosystems on local and regional scales. 

Changes in oceanographic conditions will affect primary production and 

thereby the timing, location and species composition of phytoplankton 

blooms. This will in turn affect zooplankton communities and the productivity 

of fish; e.g. a mismatch in timing of phytoplankton and zooplankton production 

due to early phytoplankton blooms may reduce the efficiency of the 

food web. Food web effects could also occur through changes in the abundance 

of top-level predators, but the effects of such changes are more difficult 

to predict. Generalist predators are likely to be more adaptable to 

changed conditions than specialist predators. All in all, significant alterations 

are to be expected for the entire food web.

The current warming trends are often linked to anthropogenic carbon dioxide 

(CO2) accumulation in the atmospheric. There is also some evidence that 

increased CO2 concentrations will reduce ocean pH and carbonate ion concentrations, 

and thereby the level of calcium carbonate saturation. If emissions 

of CO2 to the atmosphere continue to increase, acidification of the 

oceans may cause some calcifying organisms, such as coccolithophores, corals, 

echinoderms, molluscs and crustaceans, to have difficulty forming or 

maintaining their external calcium carbonate skeletons. Other effects of 

ocean acidification on marine organisms could include slower growth, decreased 

reproductive potential or increased susceptibility to disease, with 

possible implications for ecosystem structure and elemental cycling (e.g., 

Orr et al. 2005, Fabry et al. 2008, Kroeker et al. 2010), also in the assessment 

area. 

Marine ecosystems in the Arctic region are already changing in response to a 

warming climate, as documented by Wassmann et al. (2011). They found 

clear evidence for changes for almost all components of the marine ecosystems, 

also in West Greenland, ranging from planktonic communities to large 

mammals. 

Wassmann et al.’s (2011) evaluation is based on several types of footprints of 

responses in biota to climate change, such as range shifts, including poleward 

range shift of sub-Arctic species, changes in abundance, 

growth/condition, behaviour/phenology and community/regime shifts 

(Table 8.1.1). 

Table 8.1.1. Summary of types of footprints of responses of marine organisms living in the Arctic region to climate change 

(Wassmann et al. 2011) 

Responses Nature of changes 

Range shift Northward displacement of sub-Arctic and temperate species, cross-Arctic transport of organisms 

from the Pacific to the Atlantic sectors 

Abundance Increased abundance and reproductive output of sub-Arctic species, decline and reduced reproductive 

success of some Arctic species associated with the ice, and species now being used as 

prey by predators whose preferred prey have declined 

Growth and condition Increased growth of some sub-Arctic species and primary producers, and reduced growth and 

condition of icebound, ice-associated, or ice-borne animals 

Behaviour and phenology Anomalous behaviour of ice-bound, ice-associated, or ice-borne animals with earlier spring phenological 

events and delayed autumn events 

Community and regime shifts Changes in community structure due to range shifts of predators resulting in changes in the 

predator-prey linkages in the trophic network 

Some of the ongoing and expected changes and their relevance for the assessment 

area are described below. 

8.2 Primary production and zooplankton 

Currently, marine Arctic ecosystems are dominated by the diatom-feeding 

Calanus glacialis and C. hyperboreus; both of which are favoured food for specialised 

important seabirds, such as the little auk (Alle alle). A prolonged 

production period could favour a mixed diatom-dinoflagellate community, 

which could result in a food chain based on Calanus finmarchicus – Metridia 

longa, which are less valuable as a food resource for planktivorous birds and 

mammals (bowhead whale and little auk). As a result, climate change is likely 

to change primary production from strongly pulsed to a more prolonged 

177

178 

and unpredictable production of diatoms (rich in polyunsaturated fatty acids) 

with consequences for higher trophic levels (Kattner et al. 2007). 

In Southwest Greenland, including the assessment area, C. finmarchicus is already 

the dominant Calanus species, outnumbering both C. glacialis and C. 

hyperboreus by a factor of three throughout the year, depending on food 

availability (Pedersen et al. 2005, and references therein). With increasing 

temperature the predominance of C. finmarchicus will further increase, as also 

shown experimentally by Kjellerup (2011). Such a scenario will presumably 

cause a trophic cascade due to less energy content per individual 

(Hansen et al. 2003, Falk-Petersen et al. 2007). In addition, the share in biomass 

accounted for by C. finmarchicus will further increase (Hirche & 

Kosobokova 2007) due to its higher growth rate and short life cycle (Scott et 

al. 2000). A regime shift towards C. finmarchicus will without doubt influence 

important seabirds such as the little auk negatively (Karnovsky et al. 2003) 

and favour certain intermediate species like herring (Falk-Petersen et al. 

2007). 

C. finmarchicus also plays an important role as prey for larval stages of the 

Atlantic cod Gadus morhua. In West Greenland waters C. finmarchicus is the 

most important food source for cod larvae (Drinkwater 2005). Changes in its 

abundance and distribution will likely have a direct effect on the distribution 

of Atlantic cod, and other species as well. 

Since C. finmarchicus grazes on phytoplankton, its spatial distribution and 

life cycle are not only influenced by temperature but also by algal food 

abundance measured as chlorophyll a concentrations. Based on satellite data 

collected from 1997-2009 (Kahru et al. 2011) there is already some evidence 

that Chl maxima occur earlier in the year off Greenland, indicating changes 

in the development of phytoplankton blooms and thereby primary production. 

A change or increase in the primary production season in the assessment area 

could not only influence C. finmarchicus but also favour certain other zooplankton 

species, with consequences at community level. 

Phytoplankton is also a conduit for the uptake, processing and transformation 

of carbon dioxide. Changes in the amount of carbon that flows and 

cycles through this food web will change the amount of carbon retained in 

the ocean or respired back into the atmosphere. These changes may fundamentally 

alter the structure of marine Arctic ecosystems, including the assessment 

area. 

8.3 Benthic fauna 

Climate variability can also modify interactions between the pelagic and the 

benthic realm within the assessment area. Future fluctuations in zoobenthic 

communities will depend on the temperature tolerance of the present species 

and their adaptability. If further warming occurs, those species tolerating 

a wide temperature range will become more frequent, causing changes 

in the zoobenthic community structure and probably in its functional characteristics, 

especially in coastal areas, with consequences for the higher 

trophic levels. At the time being our knowledge about temperature tolerance 

and adaptability of macrobenthic species in the assessment area is limited 

and it is not possible to make predictions for changes in biogeography and

species interactions. In the review by Wassmann et al. (2011), 12 examples of 

changes in benthic communities are presented. Impacts of climate change 

included species-specific changes in growth, abundance and distribution 

ranges and community level changes in total species composition. Most of 

the examples found were geographically concentrated around Svalbard and 

the Bering Sea, where research efforts are highest. Nevertheless, they can be 

regarded as examples of changes occurring in many other marine Arctic ecosystems, 

including the assessment area. 

A future Arctic warming is also likely to result in increased freshwater runoff 

from rivers and glaciers. Besides a freshening of surface waters in nearshore 

areas, this will also lead to increased turbidity and inorganic sedimentation, 

with potential effects on the species composition of benthic communities 

(e.g. Wlodarska-Kowalczuk & Pearson 2004, Wlodarska-Kowalczuk et 

al. 2005, Pawłowska et al. 2011, Węsławski et al. 2011). 

8.4 Fish and shellfish 

Fish species form an essential link between lower and higher trophic levels; 

the larvae or juveniles of many fish species feed on zooplankton, and fish 

represent an important prey for many seabirds and marine mammals. 

Changes in temperature and oceanographic conditions will influence fish 

populations directly causing them to shift to areas with preferred temperature, 

and indirectly through the food supply and the occurrence of predators. 

Survival of organisms and populations depends upon the degree to 

which they can coincide in time with the occurrence and production of their 

prey. Changes in climate can cause changes in the timing of the production 

cycles of phytoplankton, zooplankton or fish, in some cases through an influence 

on migration times. 

Marine fish have complex life histories with eggs, larvae, juveniles and 

adults of the same species often occurring in different geographic locations 

and at different depths. Changes in temperature may have different effects 

on the various life stages of a species (Pörtner & Peck 2010). If a species has 

to shift its spawning areas due to an altered temperature regime, its continued 

success will depend on factors such as whether ocean current systems in 

the new area take the eggs and larvae to suitable nursery areas, and whether 

the nursery areas are adequate in terms of temperature, food supply, depth, 

etc. Changes in spawning and nursery areas caused by climatic changes 

may, therefore, also lead to changes in population or species abundance 

(Dommasnes 2010). 

Changes in the distribution and abundance of fish populations will have 

consequences for the entire food web, also in the assessment area. Some of 

the more abundant species are likely to move northward due to the projected 

warming, including Atlantic herring (Clupea harengus), Atlantic mackerel 

(Scomber scombrus) and Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua), and this may favour 

piscivorous birds and mammals. Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) 

is expected to shift its southern boundary northward or restrict its 

distribution more to continental slope regions (ACIA 2005). 

The interaction between changing climate and distribution of certain fish 

species has been documented for previous warming periods off Greenland 

in relation to the abundance of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) and Greenland 

halibut, Reinhardtius hippoglossoides (Horsted 2000, Drinkwater 2006, Stein 

179

180 

2007). Ecosystem changes associated with the warm period during the 1920s 

and 1930s included the expansion northwards ofboreal species, such as cod, 

haddock and herring, while colder water species such as capelin retreated 

northwards. Higher recruitment and growth led to increased biomass of important 

commercial species (i.e. cod and herring). During a period (1960- 

1970) of reduced air and ocean temperatures, cod abundance (including cod 

larvae) declined again in this region (Horsted 2000, Drinkwater 2006). Coinciding 

with the decrease in cod was an increase in northern shrimp (Pandalus 

borealis) and Greenland halibut (R. hippoglossoides). Meanwhile, the shrimp 

fishery replaced cod as a dominant industry in West Greenland (Hamilton et 

al. 2003). 

A similar response by cod as that observed during the previous warm period 

could be expected in the present warming period. For the West Greenland 

offshore cod stock, their abundance, recruitment, and individual 

growth rates have increased during the recent warming, but continue to remain 

at levels much reduced compared with those observed during the early 

20th century warming (Drinkwater 2009). It is not yet possible to indicate 

how far north Atlantic cod would be distributed if temperatures increase 

further. 

For shrimp (Pandalus borealis), duration of egg development and hatching 

are determined by local bottom temperature and are correlated to the spring 

phytoplankton bloom (Koeller et al. 2009). Shrimp appears to have adapted 

to present local temperatures and occurrence of spring bloom in matching 

hatching to food availability. Changes in water temperatures and food base 

composition may influence the distribution and abundance of northern 

shrimp. 

Current knowledge on the distribution and abundance of capelin (Mallotus 

villosus) in Greenland (including the assessment area) and elsewhere suggests 

that expected climate changes in the region would have a large impact 

on this important species. Minor temperature increases will most likely increase 

capelin productivity, provided sufficient prey resources are available 

(Hedeholm et al. 2010). A more pronounced increase in water temperature 

will probably result in a northward shift in distribution (Hansen & Hermann 

1953). Moreover, a stable capelin spawning population in the southernmost 

part of Greenland could disappear from this area (Huse & Ellingsen 2008). 

Changes in physical conditions in high latitude ecosystems will probably also 

affect fisheries. Positive effects of warming have already been documented 

for the distributions and abundance of Arcto-Norwegian cod (MacNeil et 

al. 2010). This population shows stronger year classes in warm years and 

poor year classes in cold years, and warming has led to a northern range expansion 

in Norway (Drinkwater 2006, Drinkwater 2009). As a result of 

warming, yields are predicted to increase by approximately 20% for the 

most important cod and herring stocks in Iceland, and approximately 200% 

in Greenland over the next 50 years (Arnason 2007). Climate-driven fish invasions 

into Arctic marine ecosystems, including the assessment area, are 

expected to exceed those of any other Large Marine Ecosystem (Cheung et 

al. 2010). Despite possible positive effects of climate warming predicted for 

fisheries, it is still not clear how invading species interact with native species 

and how this affects food web interactions, including those in the assessment 

area.

8.5 Marine mammals and seabirds 

The impacts of climate change on marine mammals and seabirds are likely 

to be severe, and not so straightforward to estimate since patterns of changes 

are non-uniform and highly complex (ACIA 2005). Laidre et al. (2008) compared 

seven Arctic and four sub-Arctic marine mammal species with regard 

to their habitat requirements and evidence for biological and demographic 

responses to climate change. Sensitivity of the various species to climate 

change was assessed using a quantitative index based on population size, 

geographic range, habitat specificity, diet diversity, migration, site fidelity, 

sensitivity to changes in sea ice, sensitivity to changes in the trophic web, 

and maximum population growth potential (Rmax). Marine mammals dependent 

on sea ice (e.g. hooded seal, polar bear and narwhal) appear to be 

most sensitive. Species such as ringed seal and bearded seal are less sensitive, 

primarily due to their large circumpolar distributions, large population 

sizes, and flexible habitat requirements. Due to their dependence on sea-ice 

habitat, the impacts of continued climate change will increase the vulnerability 

of all polar bear sub-populations. Population and habitat modelling have 

projected substantial future declines in the distribution and abundance of 

polar bears (Lunn et al. 2010). 

Arctic seabirds, which typically depend on large, energy-rich zooplankton, 

are likely to be negatively affected by increasing temperatures and decreasing 

ice cover, while more temperate piscivorous species may benefit from 

these changes (cf. Kitaysky & Golubova 2000). Changes in the extent and 

timing of sea-ice cover over the past several decades, for example, have led 

to changes in phenology and reproduction of thick-billed murres in Canada, 

with adverse consequences for nestling growth (Gaston et al. 2005). A circumpolar 

study of population change of both thick-billed and common 

murres showed that both species tended to decline following major changes 

in sea temperature (Irons et al. 2008). Within the assessment area it is likely 

that the breeding population of the partly planktivorous thick-billed murre 

will be gradually replaced by the cold-temperate sibling species, the piscivorous 

common murre (Gaston & Irons 2010). This will probably be a very 

slow process due to pronounced site fidelity and human disturbance. Other 

temperate species which may be favoured by increasing temperatures include 

the recent immigrant, the lesser black-backed gull. In general, the timing 

of spring migration and breeding of most species is likely to advance 

substantially in the coming decades. North of the assessment area, the phenology 

has already changed for common eider and thick-billed murre (AU & 

GINR, unpubl.). This may also be the case for the assessment area, but so far 

no data exist. Changing breeding conditions north of the assessment area, 

e.g., phenology, prey availability or available breeding habitats, may lead to 

changing numbers of wintering birds within the assessment area. 

8.6 Conclusions 

The examples given above clearly indicate that climate change has a large 

potential to modify marine ecosystems, particular in high latitude regions, 

either through a bottom-up reorganisation of the food web by altering the 

nutrient or light cycle, or top-down reorganisation by altering critical habitat 

for higher trophic level (Macdonald et al. 2005). Alterations in the density, 

distribution and/or abundance of keystone species at various trophic levels 

could have significant and rapid consequences for the structure of the ecosystems 

in which they currently occur. 

181

182 

In 2008, the United Nations Environment Programme (UNEP) passed a resolution 

expressing ‘extreme concern’ over the impacts of climate change on 

biodiversity. Although climate change is a pervasive stressor, other stressors, 

such as long-range transport of contaminants, unsustainable harvesting 

of wild species and resource development are also impacting marine Arctic 

biodiversity (CAFF 2010). 

Pathways, distribution patterns and/or toxicity of a range of contaminants 

are likely to change, and native organisms are likely to become less tolerant 

to contaminant exposure due to higher temperatures (Macdonald et al. 2005, 

Schiedek et al. 2007). 

To be able to assess potential impacts of petroleum exploration-related impacts 

on the marine environment, a holistic approach – to include climate, 

chemicals and biodiversity – is needed to fully understand marine ecosystems 

in Greenland, including the assessment area as well as how human activities 

affect them.

9 Impact assessment 

David Boertmann, Anders Mosbech, Doris Schiedek & Susse Wegeberg (AU) 

9.1 Methodology and scope 

The following assessment is based on available information compiled from 

studies published in scientific journals and reports, from previous NERI 

technical reports (e.g. Mosbech et al. 1996a, Boertmann et al. 1998, Mosbech 

et al. 1998, Mosbech 2002, Mosbech et al. 2007) and information from the oil 

spill sensitivity atlas prepared for most of West Greenland, including the assessment 

area (Mosbech et al. 2000, Mosbech et al. 2004b, a). Based on the information 

needs and knowledge gaps identified in chapter 12, supplementary 

studies may be carried out subsequent to this preliminary SEIA. Results 

from these studies will form part of the impact assessment in an updated 

version of this preliminary SEIA. 

9.1.1 Boundaries 

The assessment area covers the area described in the introduction (Fig. 

1.1.1). It is the region which potentially can be impacted by oil exploration 

related activities and particularly by a large and long-lasting oil spill deriving 

from activities in the expected licence areas. However, it cannot be ruled 

out that the area affected might be even larger, including coasts both north 

and south of the assessment area and also areas on the Canadian side of Davis 

Strait. 

The assessment includes, as far as possible, all activities associated with an 

oil field, from exploration to decommissioning. Exploration activities are expected 

to take place during summer and autumn due to the possibility of ice 

cover in winter and early spring, especially in the western part of the assessment 

area. 

Production activities will, if decided upon and initiated, take place throughout 

the year. How potential production facilities will be constructed is presently 

not known, but setup is likely to be similar to that described for the 

Disko West area by the APA (2003) study, cf. section 2.6. 

9.1.2 Impact assessment procedures 

The first step of an assessment is to identify potential interactions (overlap/contact) 

between potential petroleum activities and important ecological 

components in the area, both in time and space. Interactions are then evaluated 

for their potential to cause impacts. 

Since it is often not possible to evaluate all ecological components in the area, 

the concept of Valued Ecosystem Components (VEC) can be applied. 

VECs can be species, populations, biological events or other environmental 

features that are important to the human population (not only economically), 

have a national or international profile, can act as indicators of environmental 

change, or can be the focus of management or other administrative 

efforts. VECs can also be important flora and fauna groups, habitats (also 

183

184 

temporary and dynamic like the marginal ice zone and polynyas) and processes 

such as the spring bloom in primary production. 

The potential impact on VECs of activities during the various phases of the 

life cycle of a hydrocarbon licence area are summarised in a series of tables 

in chapters 10 and 11. The tables are based on a worst-case scenario for impacts, 

under the assumption that current (2011) guidelines for the various 

activities, as described in the text, are applied. For each VEC, examples are 

given of typical vulnerable organisms (species or larger groups) in relation 

to specific activities. These examples are non-exhaustive. 

Potential impacts are assessed under three headings: displacement, sublethal 

effects, and direct mortality. Displacement indicates spatial movement of animals 

away from an impact, and is classified as none, short term, long term 

or permanent. For sessile or planktonic organisms, displacement is not relevant, 

and this is indicated with a dash (-). Sublethal effects include all notable 

fitness-related impacts, except those that cause immediate mortality of 

adult individuals. This category therefore includes impacts which decrease 

fertility or cause mortality of juvenile life stages. Sublethal effects and direct 

mortality are classified as none, insignificant, minor, moderate or major. 

Dashes (-) are used when it is not relevant to discuss the described effect (if 

no members of a VEC are vulnerable to a given activity). 

The scale of potential impact is assessed as local, regional or global. Impacts 

may be on a higher scale than local if the activity is widespread, if it impacts 

populations originating from a larger area (e.g. migratory birds), or if it impacts 

a large part of a regional population (e.g. a large seabird colony). 

Global impacts are those which potentially affect a large part of (or the entire) 

world population of one or more species. 

It should be emphasised that quantification of the impacts on ecosystem 

components is difficult and in many cases impossible. The spatial overlap of 

the expected activities can only be assessed to a limited degree, as only the 

initial oil activities are known at this point. Furthermore, the physical properties 

of potentially spilled oil are similary not known. Moreover, there is 

still a lack of knowledge concerning important ecosystem components and 

how they interact. In addition, ecosystem function will potentially be altered 

in the near future due to climate change. 

Relevant research on toxicology, ecotoxicology and sensitivity to disturbance 

has been used, and conclusions from various sources – the Arctic Council 

Oil and Gas Assessment (Skjoldal et al. 2007), the extensive literature from 

the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska in 1989, as well as the Norwegian EIA of 

hydrocarbon activities in the Lofoten-Barents Sea (Anon 2003b) have been 

drawn upon. 

Many uncertainties still remain and expert judgement or general conclusions 

from research and EIAs carried out in other sub-Arctic or Arctic areas have 

been applied in order to evaluate risks and to assess the impacts. Much uncertainty 

in the assessment is inevitable and is conveyed with phrases such 

as ‘most likely’ or ‘most probably’.

10 Impacts of the potential routine activities 

Flemming Merkel, David Boertmann, Anders Mosbech (AU), Fernando Ugarte 

(GINR), Doris Schiedek & Susse Wegeberg (AU) 

10.1 Exploration activities 

In general all activities relating to exploration are temporary and will be 

terminated after a few years if no commercial discoveries are made. Another 

important aspect in relation to exploration is that activities can only take 

place during months when the sea is more or less free of ice. 

Environmental impacts of exploration activities relate to: 

• Noise from seismic surveys and drilling 

• Cuttings and drilling mud 

• Disposal of various substances 

• Emissions to air 

• Placement of structures. 

In relation to exploration, only the most significant impacts (from noise, cuttings 

and drilling mud) will be considered. The other issues will be dealt 

with in the production and development sections, as they are much more 

significant during these phases of the life cycle of a petroleum field. 

10.1.1 Assessment of noise 

Noise from seismic surveys 

The main environmental impacts from the seismic sound generators can potentially 

include: 

• physical damage: injury to tissue and auditory damage from the sound 

waves 

• disturbance/scaring (behavioural impacts, including masking of underwater 

communication by marine mammals). 

A recent review of the effects of seismic sound propagation on different biota 

concluded ‘that seismic sounds in the marine environment are neither 

completely without consequences nor are they certain to result in severe and 

irreversible harm to the environment’ (DFO 2004). But there are some potential 

detrimental consequences. Short-term behavioural changes (such as 

avoiding areas with seismic activity) are known and in some cases well documented, 

but longer-term changes are debated and studies are lacking. 

In Arctic waters there are certain special conditions that should be considered. 

It cannot be assumed that there is a simple relationship between sound 

pressure levels and distance to source due to ray bending caused, for example, 

by a strongly stratified water column. It is therefore difficult to base impact 

assessments on simple transmission loss models (spherical or cylindrical 

spreading) and to apply assessment results from southern latitudes to the 

Arctic (Urick 1983). For example, sound pressure may be very strong in convergence 

zones far (> 50 km) from the sound source, and this is particularly 

evident in stratified Arctic waters. This has recently been documented by 

185

186 

means of acoustic tags attached to sperm whales, which recorded high 

sound pressure levels (160 dB re µPa, pp) more than 10 km from a seismic 

array (Madsen et al. 2006). 

Another issue rarely addressed is that airgun arrays generate significant 

sound energy at frequencies many octaves higher than the frequencies of interest 

for geophysical studies. This increases concern regarding the potential 

impact particularly on toothed whales (Madsen et al. 2006). 

Impact of seismic noise on fish 

Several experts agree that adult fish will generally avoid seismic sound 

waves, seek towards the bottom, and will not be harmed. Young cod and 

redfish, as small as 30–50 mm long, are able to swim away from the mortal 

zone near the airguns (comprising a few metres) (Nakken 1922). 

It has been estimated that adult fish react to an operating seismic array at 

distances of more than 30 km, and that intense avoidance behaviour can be 

expected within 1–5 km (see below). Norwegian studies measured declines 

in fish density at distances more than 10 km from sites of intensive seismic 

activity (3D). Negative effects on fish stocks may therefore occur if adult fish 

are scared away from localised spawning grounds during spawning season. 

Outside spawning grounds, fish stocks are probably not affected by the disturbance, 

but fish can be displaced temporarily from important feeding 

grounds (Engås et al. 1996, Slotte et al. 2004). 

Adult fish held in cages in a shallow bay and exposed to an operating airgun 

(0.33 l, source level at 1 m 222.6 dB rel. to 1 µPA peak to peak) down to 5–15 

m distance sustained extensive ear damage, with no evidence of repair nearly 

2 months after exposure (McCauley et al. 2003). It was estimated that a 

comparable exposure could be expected at ranges < 500 m from a large 

seismic array (44 l) (McCauley et al. 2003). So it appears that the fish avoidance 

behaviour demonstrated in the open sea protects the fish from damage. 

In contrast to these results, marine fish and invertebrates monitored with a 

video camera in an inshore reef did not move away from airgun sounds 

with peak pressure levels as high as 218 dB (at 5.3 m relative to 1 µPA peak 

to peak) (Wardle et al. 2001). The reef fish showed involuntary startle reactions, 

but did not swim away unless the explosion source was visible to the 

fish at a distance of only about 6 m. Despite a startle reaction displayed by 

each fish every time the gun was fired, continuous observation of fish in the 

vicinity of the reef using time-lapse TV and tagged individuals did not reveal 

any sign of disorientation, and the fish continued to behave normally in 

similarly quite large numbers, before, during and after the gun firing sessions 

(Wardle et al. 2001). Another study during a full-scale seismic survey 

(2.5 days) also showed that seismic shooting had a moderate effect on the 

behaviour of the lesser sandeel (Ammodytes marinus) (Hassel et al. 2004). No 

immediate lethal effect on the sandeels was observed, either in cage experiments 

or in grab samples taken during night when sand eels were buried in 

the sediment (Hassel et al. 2004). 

The studies quoted above indicate that behavioural and physiological reactions 

to seismic sounds among fish may vary between species (for example, 

according to whether they are territorial or pelagic) and also according to the 

seismic equipment used. Generalisations should therefore be interpreted 

with caution.

Impact of seismic noise on zoo- and ichtyoplankton 

Zooplankton and fish larvae and eggs (=ichtyoplankton) cannot avoid the 

pressure wave from the airguns and can be killed within a distance of less 

than 2 m, and sublethal injuries may occur within 5 m (Østby et al. 2003). 

The relative volume of water affected is very small and population effects, if 

any, are considered to be very limited in e.g. Norwegian and Canadian assessments 

(Anon 2003a). However, in Norway, specific spawning areas in 

certain periods of the year may have very high densities of fish larvae in the 

uppermost water layers, and the Lofoten-Barents Sea area is closed for seismic 

activities during the cod and herring spawning period in May–June 

(Anon 2003a). It was concluded in an assessment of seismic activities in the 

Disko West Area that it was most likely that impacts of seismic activity (3D) 

were negligible on the recruitment to fish stocks in West Greenland waters 

(Mosbech et al. 2007). In general densities of fish eggs and larvae are low in 

the upper 10 m and most fish species spawn in a dispersed manner in winter 

or spring, with little or no temporal overlap with seismic activities. Recent 

studies suggest that eggs and larvae drift slowly though the assessment area 

at depths of 13-40 m (Simonsen et al. 2006). There is limited data on fish egg 

and larvae densities as well as zooplankton, but it can be assumed that the 

density in the upper 10 m will not be significantly higher than that which 

has been found to date in Greenland waters. It is therefore most likely that 

impacts of seismic activity (even 3D) on zooplankton and on the recruitment 

to fish stocks are negligible in the assessment area. 

Impact of seismic noise on fisheries 

Norwegian studies (Engås et al. 1996) have shown that 3D seismic surveys (a 

shot fired every 10 seconds and 125 m between 36 lines 10 nm long) reduced 

catches of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) and haddock (Melanogramma aeglefinus) 

at 250–280 m in depth. This occurred not only in the shooting area but 

as far as 18 nautical miles away. The catches did not return to normal levels 

within 5 days after shooting (when the experiment was terminated), but it 

was assumed that the effect was short term and catches would return to 

normal after the studies. The effect was, moreover, more pronounced for 

large fish compared with smaller fish. 

The commercial fisheries which will overlap in space with seismic surveys in 

the assessment area are the offshore trawling for Greenland halibut and 

northern shrimp and snow crab catches. 

A Canadian review (DFO 2004) concluded that the ecological effect of seismic 

surveys on fish is low and that changes in catchability probably are species 

dependent. A Norwegian review (Dalen et al. 2008) concluded that the 

results of Engås et al. (1996) described above cannot be applied to other fish 

species and to fisheries at other water depths. Greenland halibut is very different 

from Atlantic cod and haddock with respect to anatomy, taxonomy 

and ecology. For example Greenland halibut has no swim bladder, which 

means that its hearing ability is reduced compared with fish with a swim 

bladder, in particular at higher frequencies, as it is likely to be sensitive to 

only the particle motion part of the sound field, not the pressure field. 

Moreover, the fishery takes place in much deeper waters than in the Norwegian 

experiments with haddock and Atlantic cod. The only study including 

Greenland halibut is a Norwegian study dealing with gillnet and longline 

fisheries (Løkkeborg et al. 2010). However, this study showed contradictory 

results, where gillnet catches increased during seismic shooting and re- 

187

188 

mained higher in the period after shooting, while longline catches of Greenland 

halibut, on the other hand, decreased during seismic shooting. 

Based on these contradictory results and the fact that the offshore fishery of 

Greenland halibut has not been studied it is difficult to assess the effect of 

seismic activity. However, if catches are reduced by a seismic survey, the effect 

is most likely temporary and will probably only affect specific fisheries 

for a few days. The offshore fishery of Greenland halibut in the assessment 

area is large in relation to the total catch in Greenland and the trawling 

grounds are restricted to specific depths at approximately 1,500 m. Alternative 

fishing grounds would therefore be limited if Greenland halibut are 

displaced by seismic activity. Another potential impact is the risk of scaring 

spawning fish away from the spawning grounds. These are assumed to be 

situated on the slope of the sill between Greenland and Baffin Island, but as 

spawning is assumed to take place in early winter the seismic activity would 

probably be absent or very low. In Norway, some spawning grounds for 

herring and cod are closed for seismic surveys in the spawning period. 

It should be mentioned that there are other examples where fisheries have 

increased after seismic shooting, which is assumed to be an effect of changes 

in the vertical distribution of the fish (Hirst & Rodhouse 2000). 

The few studies available on seismic impacts on crustacean fisheries did not 

find any reduction in catchability (Hirst & Rodhouse 2000, Christian et al. 

2003, Andriguetto-Filho et al. 2005, Parry & Gason 2006), indicating that the 

shrimp and crab fisheries within the assessment area (Fig. 5.1.1 and 5.1.2) 

will not be affected by seismic surveys. 

Impact of seismic noise on birds 

Seabirds are generally not considered to be sensitive to seismic surveys, because 

they are highly mobile and able to avoid the seismic sound source. 

However, in inshore waters, seismic surveys carried out near the coast may 

disturb (due to the presence and activity of the ship) breeding and moulting 

congregations. 

Next to nothing is known about underwater hearing in diving sea birds and 

no-one has attempted to assess the possible impact of exposure to airgun 

sounds during diving. Their hearing ability underwater is likely to be inferior 

to marine mammals and in any case restricted to lower frequencies, not 

extending into the ultrasonic range. Diving birds are not known to use hearing 

underwater, but may do so. Diving birds may potentially suffer damage 

to their inner ears if diving very close to the airgun array, but unlike in the 

case of mammals, the sensory cells of the inner ear of birds can regenerate 

after damage from acoustic trauma (Ryals & Rubel 1988) and hearing impairment, 

even after intense exposure, is therefore temporary. 

Impact of seismic noise on marine mammals 

Responses of marine mammals to noise fall into three main categories: physiological, 

behavioural and acoustic (Nowacek et al. 2007). Physiological responses 

include hearing threshold shifts and auditory damage. Behavioural 

responses include changes in surfacing, diving and heading patterns, and 

may result in avoidance of the area or reduced feeding success. Low frequency 

sounds may effectively mask the calls of baleen whales, thus interfering 

with their social activities and/or navigation and feeding activities. 

Acoustic responses to masking by anthropogenic noise include changes in

type or timing of vocalisations. In addition, there may be indirect effects associated 

with altered prey availability (Gordon et al. 2003). 

There is strong evidence for behavioural effects on marine mammals from 

seismic surveys (Compton et al. 2008). Mortality has not been documented, 

but there is a potential for physical damage, primarily auditory damage. 

Under experimental conditions temporary elevations in hearing threshold 

(TTS) have been observed (Richardson et al. 1995, Anon 2005). In the USA a 

sound pressure level of 180 dB re 1µPA) (rms) or higher is believed to provoke 

TTS or PTS and is adopted by the US National Marine Fisheries Service 

as a mitigation standard to protect whales (NMFS 2003, Miller et al. 2005). 

Displacement is a behavioural response, and there are many documented 

cases of displacement from feeding grounds or migratory routes of marine 

mammals exposed to seismic sounds. The extent of displacement varies between 

species and also between individuals within the same species. For example, 

a study in Australia showed that migrating humpback whales generally 

avoided seismic sound sources at distances of 4-8 km but occasionally 

came closer. In the Beaufort Sea autumn-migrating bowhead whales avoid 

areas where the noise from exploratory drilling and seismic surveys exceeds 

117–135 dB and they may avoid the seismic source by distances of up to 35 

km (Reeves et al. 1984, Richardson et al. 1986, Ljungblad et al. 1988, Brewer 

et al. 1993, Hall et al. 1994, NMFS 2002, Gordon et al. 2003); although a Canadian 

study showed somewhat shorter distances (Lee et al. 2005). White 

whales avoided seismic operations in Arctic Canada by 10-20 km (Lee et al. 

2005). Stone & Tasker (2006) showed a significant reduction in marine 

mammal sightings during seismic surveys in the UK during periods of 

shooting compared with non-shooting periods. In the Mediterranean, bearings 

of singing fin whales estimated with passive acoustic monitoring indicated 

that whales moved away from the airgun source and out of the area 

for a time period that extended well beyond the duration of the airgun activity 

(Castellote et al. 2010). In contrast, minke whales have been observed as 

close as 100 m to operating airgun arrays (AU unpublished), which is potentially 

close enough to sustain physical damage. 

The ecological significance of displacement effects is generally unknown. If 

alternative areas are available the impact probably will be low and the temporary 

character of seismic surveys will allow displaced animals to return 

after the surveys. 

In West Greenland waters satellite-tracked humpback whales utilised extensive 

areas and moved between widely spaced feeding grounds, presumably 

searching for their preferred prey (krill, sandeel and capelin) as prey availability 

shifted through the season (Heide-Jørgensen & Laidre 2007). The ability 

of humpback whales to find prey in different locations may suggest that 

they would have access to alternative foraging areas if they were displaced 

from one area by a seismic activity. However, even though many areas can 

be used, a few key zones seem to be especially important. The satellitetracked 

humpback whales favoured a zone on the shelf within the assessment 

area with high concentrations of sandeel (Heide-Jørgensen & Laidre 

2007). Similarly, a modelling study based on cetacean and prey surveys 

showed that rorquals (fin, sei, blue, minke and humpback whale) and krill 

aggregate in three high density areas on the West Greenland banks (Laidre 

et al. 2010). One of these important feeding areas covers the northern part of 

the assessment area. Displacement from major feeding areas can therefore 

189

190 

have a negative impact on the energy uptake of the rorquals that are in West 

Greenland to feed before their southward migration. Given the extent of oil 

exploration in Greenland, there is a risk of cumulative effects if multiple 

surveys occur at the same time in adjacent areas. In this case marine mammals 

could be excluded from key habitats and unable to use alternative foraging 

grounds. 

The US National Marine Fisheries Service defines the radii about a seismic 

ship with received sound levels of 160 dB (re 1µPA) as the distance within 

which some cetaceans are likely to be subject to behavioural disturbance 

(NMFS 2005). Actual distances would depend on the source levels of the airgun 

array, the salinity and temperature layers of the water, and the depth of 

the observation. A few studies have observed lack of measurable behavioural 

changes by cetaceans exposed to the sound of seismic surveys taking place 

several kilometres away. For instance, Madsen et al. (2002) found no reaction 

of sperm whales to a distant seismic survey operating at tens of kilometres 

away. More recently, Dunn & Hernandez (2009) did not detect changes in 

the behaviour of blue whales that were at 15-90 km from operating airguns. 

The authors estimated that the whales experienced sounds of less than 145 

dB (re 1µPA) and concluded that, while their study supports the current US- 

NMFS guidelines, further studies with more detailed observations are warranted 

(Dunn & Hernandez 2009). 

An acoustic effect widely discussed in relation to whales and seismic surveys 

is the masking of communication and echolocation sounds. There are, 

however, very few studies which document such effects (but see Castellote 

et al. 2010, Di Iorio & Clark 2010), mainly because the experimental setup is 

extremely challenging. Masking requires overlap in frequencies, overlap in 

time and sufficiently high sound pressures. The whales and seals in the assessment 

area use a wide range of frequencies (from < 10 Hz to > 100 kHz, 

Fig. 4.8.6), so the low frequency sounds of seismic surveys are likely to overlap 

in frequency with at least some of the sounds produced by these marine 

mammals. 

Masking is likely to occur as a result of the continuous noise from drilling 

and ship propellers, as documented for beluga whales and killer whales in 

Canada (Foote et al. 2004, Scheifele et al. 2005). Due to the low frequency of 

their phonation, baleen whales followed by seals would be the marine 

mammals most affected by auditory masking from seismic surveys (Gordon 

et al. 2003). It has furthermore been shown that blue whales increase their 

calling rate during seismic surveys, probably as a compensatory behaviour 

to the elevated ambient noise (Di Iorio & Clark 2010). Similarly, changes in 

the acoustic parameters of fin whale calls in the presence of airgun events 

indicate that fin whales also modify their acoustic behaviour to compensate 

for increased ambient noise (Castellote et al. 2010). 

Sperm whales showed diminished foraging effort during airgun emission, 

but it is not clear if this was due to masking of echolocation sounds or to behavioural 

responses of the whales or the prey (Miller et al. 2005). 

The most noise-vulnerable whale species in the assessment area belong to 

the baleen whales – minke, fin, blue and humpback whale – and the toothed 

whales – sperm whale and bottlenose whale (probably) – all of which all are 

present in the area during the ice free months when seismic surveys usually 

take place. At the time of writing this assessment we were not aware of any

detailed studies on the effect of seismic surveys on bottlenose whales, pilot 

whales, white beaked dolphins or harbour porpoises. White whales, narwhals 

and bowhead whales are also sensitive to seismic sounds, but are present 

in the area during wintertime only. Bowhead whales, for example, migrate 

through part of the assessment area in December-January (Heide- 

Jørgensen & Laidre 2010). The risk of overlap between these species and 

seismic operations is therefore confined to winter. 

In general, seals display considerable tolerance to underwater noise 

(Richardson et al. 1995), confirmed by a study in Arctic Canada in which 

ringed seals showed only limited avoidance of seismic operations (Lee et al. 

2005). In another study, ringed seals were shown to habituate to industrial 

noise (Blackwell et al. 2004). However, walruses, especially when hauled 

out, may be disturbed and displaced by seismic activity but not so much by 

the seismic noise. There is an important winter feeding and mating ground 

for walrus where they haul out on ice directly north of the assessment area. 

Mitigation of impacts from seismic noise 

Mitigation measures generally recommend a soft start or ramp up of the airgun 

array each time a new line is initiated (review by Compton et al. 2008). 

This allows marine mammals to detect and avoid the sound source before it 

reaches levels dangerous to the animals. 

Secondly, it is recommended that skilled marine mammal observers are present 

onboard the seismic ships in order to detect whales and instruct the 

crew to delay shooting when whales are within a certain distance (usually 

500 m) of the array. In sensitive areas detection of whales in the vicinity can 

be made more efficient, depending on species, with the additional use of 

hydrophones for recording whale vocalisations (Passive Acoustic Monitoring 

– PAM); although the whales present would not necessarily emit sounds. 

There are problems with respect to visual observations. In Arctic waters, 

very high sound pressures may occur far from the sound source and out of 

sight of the observer (see above). Another problem is that seismic surveys 

are carried out day and night, and visual observations are only possible in 

daylight. 

A third mitigating measure is to close areas in sensitive periods. The spawning 

grounds for herring and cod are closed for seismic surveys in the Lofoten-Barents 

Sea area during the spawning season. 

NERI (now DCE) has issued a set of guidelines for conducting seismic surveys 

in Greenland waters, and protection areas (where seismic surveys are 

regulated) for narwhal and walrus are designated in areas outside the present 

assessment area (Boertmann et al. 2010). A similar protection area for 

the bowhead whale should be considered in the Disko Bay waters in spring. 

Finally, it is recommended that local authorities and hunters' organisations 

be informed before seismic activities take place in their local area. This may 

help hunters to take into account that animals may be disturbed and displaced 

from certain areas at times when activities are taking place. 

In Arctic Canada a number of mitigation measures were applied to minimise 

impacts from seismic surveys on marine mammals and the subsistence hunting 

of these (Miller et al. 2005). Some were identical to those mentioned 

above, and the most important was a delay in the start of seismic operation 

191

192 

both until the end of the beluga whale hunt and the period of occupation of 

especially important beluga whale habitats. Some particularly important beluga 

whale areas were even completely closed for surveys. 

In the NERI guidelines for seismic surveys (Boertmann et al. 2010) some important 

issues to consider in assessing the impacts of seismic surveys were 

listed: 

• The species that could be affected; as tolerance to seismic surveys varies 

between species 

• The natural behaviour of these species when surveys are taking place. 

Disturbance varies according to species' annual cycles, e.g. the degree of 

sensitivity of animals engaged in mating and calving or those feeding or 

migrating. 

• The severity and duration of impact. Even a strong startle reaction to an 

approaching survey vessel may have only a small total impact on the animal 

whereas a small, but prolonged (days or weeks) disturbance to feeding 

behaviour could have a much greater impact. 

• Total number of animals likely to be affected. It is not possible to conduct 

seismic surveys in the Arctic without affecting marine mammals at all. 

The number of animals likely to be affected should be assessed in relation 

to the size of the population, local stocks and season. 

• Local conditions for sound transmission, such as hydrographic and 

bathygraphic conditions, may result in highly unusual sound transmission 

properties. Potential consequences of these effects should be included 

in the assessment. 

When planning surveys efforts should be made to minimise the overall exposure 

to the degree possible by using the smallest airgun array that enables 

collection of the data needed. Total exposure is a complex function of the 

number of animals exposed, the time each animal is exposed and the sound 

level each animal experiences. Nevertheless, reducing any of these three parameters 

would reduce the total exposure, so the possibility of reducing one 

or more factors should be considered in the planning phase. 

Conclusions on disturbance from seismic noise (Table 10.1.1) 

The VECs most sensitive to seismic noise in the assessment area are the baleen 

whales, minke, fin, blue and humpback, and toothed whales such as 

sperm and bottlenose whales. These may be in risk of being displaced from 

critical summer habitats. A displacement will also impact the availability 

(for hunters) of whales if the habitats include traditionally hunting grounds. 

Narwhals, beluga whales, bowhead whales and walruses are also sensitive 

to seismic noise, but their occurrence will only overlap with seismic surveys 

during winter. 

As seismic surveys are temporary, the risk of long-term impacts is low. But 

long-term impacts have to be assessed if several surveys are carried out 

simultaneously or in the same potentially critical habitats during consecutive 

years (cumulative effect). There is a small risk of long-term effects for 

toothed whales suffering permanent auditory damage caused by critical exposure 

to seismic noise.

Table 10.1.1. Overview of potential impacts from a single seismic 2D survey on VECs in the Davis Strait assessment area. See 

section 4.9 for a summary of the VECs. It is important to note that a single seismic survey is temporary (days or a few weeks) 

and that cumulative impacts of several simultaneous or consecutive surveys may be more pronounced. This assessment assumes 

the application of current (2011) mitigation guidelines, see text for details. 

VEC Typical vulnerable organisms 

Population impact* - worst case 

Displacement Sublethal effect Direct mortality 

Pelagic hotspots copepods, fish larvae - insignificant (L) insignificant (L) 

Tidal/subtidal zone none - - - 

Demersal fish & offshore benthos Gl. halibut short term (L) insignificant none 

Seabirds (breeding) none - - - 

Seabirds (non-breeding) none - - - 

Marine mammals (summer) baleen & toothed whales short term (L) insignificant (R) none** 

Marine mammals (winter) bowhead, beluga, narwhal short term (L) insignificant (R) none** 

* L = local, R = regional and G = global; ** For toothed whales permanent auditory damages can theoretically be lethal, but 

death would occur long after the event of sound exposure. Here, this risk is defined as a sublethal effect. 

The fishery at risk of impacts from seismic surveys in the assessment area is 

the Greenland halibut fishery. There is a risk of a temporary displacement of 

fish and consequently reduced catches from the trawling grounds. Although 

the precise location of the Greenland halibut spawning grounds is not 

known, the planning of seismic surveys in the suspected area should consider 

avoiding overlap in the spawning period. The fishery of northern shrimp 

and snow crab will probably not be affected. 

Noise from drilling rigs 

This noise has two sources, the drilling process and the propellers keeping 

the drill ship/rig in position. The noise is continuous in contrast to the pulses 

generated by seismic airguns. 

Generally a drill ship generates more noise than a semi-submersible platform, 

which in turn is noisier than a jack-up. Jack-ups will most likely not be 

employed within the assessment area, due to water depths and the hazard 

risk from drift ice and icebergs. 

Whales are believed to be the organisms most sensitive to this kind of underwater 

noise (Table 10.1.2), because they depend on the underwater 

acoustic environment for orientation and communication and it is believed 

that this communication can be masked by the noise. But also seals (especially 

bearded seal) and walrus communicate when underwater. However, systematic 

studies on whales and noise from drill rigs are limited. It is generally 

believed that whales are more tolerant of fixed noise than noise from moving 

sources (Davis et al. 1990), and auditory masking from boat noise has 

been demonstrated for beluga whales and killer whales in Canada (Foote et 

al. 2004, Scheifele et al. 2005). In Alaskan waters migrating bowhead whales 

avoided an area with a radius of 10 km around a drill ship (Richardson et al. 

1995) and their migrating routes were displaced away from the coast during 

oil production on an artificial island; although this reaction was mainly attributed 

to the noise from support vessels (Greene et al. 2004). 

193

Table 10.1.2. Overview of potential impacts of noise 1 and discharge 2 from a single exploration drilling on VECs in the Davis 

Strait assessment area. See section 4.9 for a summary of the VECs. This assessment assumes the application of current 

(2011) mitigation guidelines, see text for details (no use of oil based mud). 


194 

As described in section 4.8 bowhead whales occur in the assessment area in 

winter and during spring migration. Their migration corridor seems to be 

wide enough to provide alternative routes (Fig. 4.8.7), and displacement of 

single animals similar to that described from the Beaufort Sea probably has 

no significant effect here, provided that drilling operations are not simultaneous 

in multiple sites. 

Also narwhals, beluga whales and walruses will only overlap with the season 

for exploration drilling for a brief period in winter, and no large effects 

are expected. 

Rorquals (fin, minke, humpback and blue whale), white beaked dolphins 

and harbour porpoises in shelf waters, as well as sperm whales, bottlenose 

whales and pilot whales on the continental slope could be displaced by drilling 

operations. However, there is no knowledge to date on critical habitats 

for these species. 

Conclusion on noise from exploration drilling rigs 

Exploration activities are temporary and displacement of marine mammals 

caused by noise from drilling rigs will also be temporary. The most vulnerable 

VECs in the assessment area are the baleen whales such as fin, minke 

and humpback whales and toothed whales such as sperm whale and harbour 

porpoise. The walruses occurring at the northern edge of the assessment 

area are also highly vulnerable. If alternative habitats are available to 

the whales no long-term effects are expected (Table 10.1.2), but if several rigs 

operate in the same region there is a risk for cumulative effects and displacement 

from key habitats. 

10.1.2 Drilling mud and cuttings 



Pelagic hotspots 2 plankton, zooplankton - insignificant (L) insignificant (L) 

Tidal/subtidal zone none - - - 

Demersal fish & Gl. halibut, sandeel short term(L) minor (L) none 

offshore benthos 2 filter feeders (e.g. corals) short term(L) minor (L) minor (L) 

Seabirds (breeding) none - - - 

Seabirds (non-breeding) 2 king eider short term (L) insignificant (R) none 

Marine mammals (summer) 1 baleen & toothed whales short term (L) minor (L) none 

Marine mammals (winter) 1 bowheads, bearded seal, walrus, short term (L) 

narwhal 

minor (L) none 

* L = local, R = regional and G = global 

Drilling creates substantial quantities of drilling waste composed of rock 

cuttings and the remnants of drilling mud (see section 2.3). Cuttings and 

mud are usually deposited on the sea floor beneath the drill rig, where they 

can change the physical and chemical composition of the substrate (e.g. increased 

concentrations of certain metals and hydrocarbons) (Breuer et al. 

2008). The liquid base of the drilling mud may be water (WBM – water 

based mud) or synthetic fluids (SM – synthetic mud; ethers, esters, olefins, 

etc). Previously oil was used (OBM – oil based mud), but this has almost

een eliminated on the grounds of environmental concerns. OBMs may be 

used for special drillings, but then the mud is injected into wellbores or 

brought to land for treatment. 

The general pattern of impacts on benthic animals from cuttings from Norwegian 

wells is that OBM cuttings elicit the most widespread impacts and 

WBM cuttings the least. Ester-based cuttings have been shown to cause severe 

but short-lived effects due to their rapid degradation, which may result 

in oxygen depletion in the sediments. Olefin-based cuttings are also degraded 

fairly rapidly, but without causing oxygen deficiency and therefore have 

short-lived and moderate effects on the fauna. 

Most of the impact studies on mud and drill cuttings are made with OBMs 

(e.g., Davies et al. 1984, Neff 1987, Gray et al. 1990, Ray & Engelhardt 1992, 

Olsgaard & Gray 1995, Breuer et al. 2004). Effects from OBMs were widespread 

(up to 6 km from the release site) and persisted longer than the release 

phase. Furthermore, the area affected continued to increase in size for 

several years after discharge ceased (Breuer et al. 2008) and sublethal effects 

in some species of fish living near drill sites were also detected (Davies et al. 

1984). A further risk from discarding cuttings polluted with oil residues is 

tainting of commercial fish (see Section 11.2.6). 

Synthetic mud also leads to impacts on benthic fauna, though less pronounced 

than around platforms where OBMs were used (Jensen et al. 1999). 

Field studies on impacts from WBMs are relatively few. A few specially designed 

surveys indicated that effects are restricted to a distance of less than 

100 m from the platforms (Schaaning et al. 2008 and references therein). The 

use of WBM combined with cleaning of the cuttings may therefore limit the 

effects on the benthos to highly localised areas around each exploration drill 

site (Table 10.1.2). The use of WBM potentially moves effects on the seafloor 

to the water column, where dilution is a major factor in reducing impacts. In 

Norway a change to WBM has resulted in a marked decrease of the level of 

impacts on the seafloor (Renaud et al. 2007). 

Cold water corals and sponges are also sensitive to suspended material in 

the water column (Table 10.1.2) (Freiwald et al. 2004, SFT 2008). Corals have 

been found in the western part of the Davis Strait (Edinger et al. 2007) and in 

Greenland waters they are frequently encountered along the continental 

slope of Southwest Greenland, including the assessment area (ICES 2010a). 

Recently, a ban against trawling in two areas south of Maniitsoq (64°N) was 

suggested due to observations of high abundance of corals. As the seabed at 

all potential drill sites is surveyed for these organisms before drilling, it 

should be possible to avoid impacts on this sensitive biota in Greenlandic 

waters. 

Multiple drillings carried out when a field is developed may cause more 

widespread effects on the benthos and it is important to note in this regard 

that the seafloor fauna in the assessment area is still poorly known. Discharges 

of cuttings with water-based drill fluids are likely to disperse widely 

in the water column before reaching the seabed and may also impact pelagic 

organisms such as plankton (Røe & Johnsen 1999, Jensen et al. 2006). However, 

more knowledge is needed on the hydrodynamics to evaluate the 

spreading, dilution and sedimentation of the substances. Biological effects 

195

196 

from the particles in the water-based mud have been observed on fish and 

bivalves under laboratory conditions (Bechmann et al. 2006). 

Mitigation of impacts from the release of drilling mud and cuttings 

The best way of mitigating impacts from drilling mud and cuttings in the 

marine environment is to bring these to land or re-inject the material into 

wellbores. This, however, creates other environmental impacts such as increased 

emission of greenhouse gasses from the transport and pumping and 

problems with treatment or re-use on land (SFT 2008). These have then to be 

balanced against the impacts on the water column and on the seafloor. A recent 

report (SFT 2008) has recommended that general zero-discharge requirements 

relating to water-based drill cuttings and mud are not introduced 

in Norway. 

It is generally assessed that impacts from water-based muds are limited, 

which is why they are usually released to the marine environment when the 

drilling is over. However, as part of the post-drill environmental monitoring 

that licence holders off the coast of Greenland are required to perform during 

exploration drilling, particle transport in relation to drilling mud has to 

be modelled and sediment traps have to be set up to measure the potential 

spatial distribution of these particles. Impacts can be further reduced by application 

of environmentally friendly drilling chemicals, such as those classified 

by OSPAR (HOCNF) as ‘green’/PLONOR (Pose Little Or No Risk to the 

Environment) or ‘yellow’. However, in general these chemicals have not yet 

been evaluated under Arctic conditions with regard to degradation and toxicity, 

and all chemicals to be discharged should be assessed and evaluated 

before they are approved for release. 

In Norway, releases to the marine environment of environmentally hazardous 

substances (‘red’ and ‘black’ chemicals) have been reduced by 99% in 

the period 1997-2007, through application of the international standards, 

BAT and BEP (SFT 2008). In Greenland the use of ‘black’ chemicals is not allowed 

and specific permission is required for the use of ‘red’ chemicals. 

Impacts from oil-contaminated drill cuttings should be mitigated by keeping 

them on board for deposition or cleaning on land. 

Conclusion on discharges from exploration drilling 

Within the assessment area only very local effects on the benthos are to be 

expected from discharging the water-based muds (WBM) during exploration 

drilling (Table 10.1.2). For this reason, the potential impact on benthic feeders, 

such as king eider, walrus and bearded seal, will probably not be significant. 

However, baseline studies and environmental monitoring should be 

conducted at all drill sites to document spatial and temporal effects, and to 

assess if there are unique communities or species that could be harmed. 

10.2 Appraisal activities 

Activities during the appraisal phase are similar to exploration activities (see 

above) and the impacts are the same. However, there is an increased risk of 

cumulative impacts as the phase usually takes place over several years.

10.3 Development and production activities 

In contrast to the temporary activities of the exploration phase, activities 

during development and production are usually long lasting, depending on 

the amount of producible petroleum products and the production rate. The 

activities are numerous and extensive, and the effects on the environment 

can be summarised under following headings: 

• solid and fluid waste materials to be disposed of 

• placement of structures 

• noise from facilities and transport 

• emissions to air. 

10.3.1 Produced water 

During production several by-products and waste products are produced 

that have to be disposed of in one way or another. Produced water is by far 

the largest contributor in his respect from an oil field (see section 2.4). 

Generally it is assessed that the environmental impacts from produced water 

discharged to the sea are small due to dilution. For example, discharges during 

the 5% ‘off normal time’ in Lofoten-Barents Sea been assessed not to impact 

stocks of important fish species. But in the same assessment it is also 

stated that the long-term effects of the release of produced water are unknown 

(Rye et al. 2003). Particular concern surrounds polycyclic aromatic 

hydrocarbons (PAHs), the hormone-disrupting phenols, radioactive components 

and nutrients in relation to toxic concentrations, bioaccumulation, fertilisation, 

etc (Rye et al. 2003). 

Impacts on the marine environment from produced water can be reduced by 

injecting it into wellbores. This is not always possible (STF 2008) and when it 

is international standards (OSPAR) must be applied as a minimum. This 

means that the oil content may not be higher than 30 mg/l. In Norway released 

produced water in recent years had an average oil content of 11 mg/l 

(Anon 2011a). 

Nutrient concentrations can be very high in produced water (e.g. ammonia 

up to 40 mg/l). When diluted these nutrients may have an ecological effect 

as a fertiliser, which could impact especially the composition of primary 

producers (planktonic algae) (Rivkin et al. 2000, Armsworthy et al. 2005). 

Even though oil concentrations in produced water on average are low, oil 

sheen may occur on the water surface where the water is discharged, especially 

in calm weather. This gives reason for concern, because sheen is sufficient 

to impact seabirds and together with other low concentration oil discharges, 

such impacts may be significant (Fraser et al. 2006). 

To test potential effects of produced water on organisms, cages with Atlantic 

cod and blue mussels, respectively, were positioned at various distances (0- 

5000 m) in different directions from oil platforms in Norway. In addition, 

two reference locations were used, both 8000 m away from the respective 

platforms. PAH tissue residues in blue mussels ranged between 0-40ng/g 

ww depending on the distance to the oil rigs. PAH bile metabolites in cod 

confirmed exposure to effluents, but levels were low when compared to 

those found in cod from coastal waters (Hylland et al. 2008). The biological 

197

198 

effects found in the blue mussels reflect exposure gradients and that the 

mussels were affected by components in the produced water. 

Atlantic cod was also used to assess possible impacts of alkylphenols, also 

present in produced water and suspected to belong to those substances that 

cause endocrine disruptive effects in fish (Lie et al. 2009). In another study 

the genotoxic potential of water-soluble oil components on Atlantic cod has 

been documented (Holth et al. 2009). 

Finally, the release of produced water under the ice gives reason for concern, 

because there is a risk of accumulation just below the ice, where degradation, 

evaporation, etc are slow and the sensitive under-ice ecosystem, including 

the eggs and larvae of the key species polar cod may be exposed 

(Skjoldal et al. 2007). 

10.3.2 Other discharged substances 

Besides produced water, discharges of oil components and various chemicals 

occur in connection with deck drainage, cooling water, ballast water, 

bilge water, cement slurry and testing of blowout preventers. Such releases 

are regulated by the OSPAR convention, and these standards should be applied 

as a minimum in order to minimise impacts. Sanitary wastewater is 

usually also released to the sea. The environmental impacts of these discharges 

are generally small from a single drilling rig or production facility, 

but releases from many facilities and/or over long periods of time may be of 

concern. BAT (Best Available Technology), BEP (Best Environmental Practice), 

applying international standards (OSPAR and MARPOL) and introduction 

of less environmentally damaging chemicals or reduction in volume 

of the releases all represent ways in which the effects can be reduced. It 

should be mentioned that release of environmentally hazardous substances 

from the oil industry to the marine environment in Norwegian areas has 

been reduced by 99% over 20 years by applying these measures (SFT 2008). 

Ballast water from ships poses a special biological problem, i.e. the risk that 

non-native and invasive species (also termed as Aquatic Nuisance Species – 

ANS) are introduced to the local ecosystem (Anon 2003a). This is generally 

considered a severe threat to marine biodiversity and, for example, blooms 

of toxic algae in Norway have been ascribed to release of ballast water from 

ships. There are also many examples of introduced species which have impacted 

fisheries in a negative way (e.g. the comb jelly Mnemiopsis in the 

Black Sea (Kideys 2002). 

Presently, the Arctic seas are the least severely affected areas by non-native 

invasive species as shown by Molnar et al. (2008). However, many tankers 

releasing ballast water near an oil terminal and the increasing water temperatures, 

particularly in the Arctic, may increase the risk of successful introduction 

of alien, invasive species in future. 

There are methods to minimise the risk from releasing ballast water, e.g. in 

applying the international ballast water management convention, which restricts 

and regulates the exchange of ballast water. The International Maritime 

Organization (IMO) has adopted this convention and requires that 

ships follow a strict ballast water management plan and in future install ballast 

water management systems to treat the ballast water before its release 

into the environment (IMO 1998). All vessels and drilling units involved in

hydrocarbon activities in Greenland have to follow the IMO guidelines or 

the relevant Canadian regulations. 

However, invasive species can also be introduced by transport of organisms 

attached to the hull of the ships. 

10.3.3 Placement of structures 

Construction of subsea wells and pipelines has the potential to destroy parts 

of important habitats on the seafloor. In other regions especially sponge gardens 

and reefs of cold water corals are considered as sensitive. Other important 

habitats are feeding grounds for bearded seal, walrus and king eider, 

which live on benthic mussels and other invertebrates. An assessment of 

the impact of such constructions must wait until production site location is 

known and site-specific EIAs and background studies have been carried out. 

Structures may also have a disturbance effect particularly on marine mammals. 

Illumination and flaring attract birds at night (Wiese et al. 2001). In Greenland 

this problem especially relates to eider ducks. Under certain weather 

conditions (e.g. fog and snowy weather) on winter nights, eiders are attracted 

to the lights on ships (Merkel 2010b). Occasionally hundreds of eiders are 

killed on a single ship, and not only are eiders killed, but these birds are so 

heavy that they destroy antennae and other structures (Boertmann et al. 

2006). A preliminary study of this issue has been conducted by GINR 

(Merkel 2010b). 

A related problem occurs in the North Sea, which millions of song birds 

cross on their nocturnal autumn and spring migrations. Large numbers of 

song birds under certain weather conditions are attracted to light from illumination 

and flaring (Bourne 1979, Jones 1980). No such migrations take 

place in the assessment area. However, concern for nocturnalmigrating little 

auks has recently been expressed (Fraser et al. 2006), and this species occurs 

in very large densities within the assessment area. A method to mitigate the 

attraction of birds is changing the colour of the lighting to colours that do 

not attract birds, e.g. green (Poot et al. 2008). 

Placement of structures affects the fisheries due to exclusion (safety) zones. 

These areas, however, would be small compared with the total fishable area. 

A drilling platform with exclusion zone with a radius of 500 m covers approx. 

7 km 2 . In the Lofoten-Barents Sea area the effects of exclusion zones on 

the fisheries are generally estimated to be low, except in areas where very 

localised and intensive fishery activity takes place. In such areas reduced 

catches may be expected, because there are no alternative areas available 

(OED 2006). Pipelines in the Lofoten-Barents Sea area are not expected to 

impact fisheries, because they will be constructed in a way that allows trawling 

across them; although a temporary exclusion zone must be expected 

during the construction phase of pipelines. Experience from the North Sea 

indicates that large ships will trawl across subsea structures and pipelines, 

while small ships often choose to avoid the crossing of such structures 

(Anon 2003b). 

Another effect of exclusion zones is that they act as sanctuaries, and in combination 

with the artificial reefs created by the subsea structures (Kaiser & 

199

200 

Pulsipher 2005), attract fish and even seals. Especially the fish may be exposed 

to the contaminants from release of produced water. 

Placement of structures onshore in coastal habitats may impact rivers with 

spawning and wintering Arctic char by creating obstructions they cannot 

cross, resulting in the loss of a local population. 

Placement of structures onshore also imposes a risk of spoiling habitats for 

unique coastal flora and fauna. 

When dealing with placement of structures, particularly on land and in 

coastal habitats, aesthetic aspects must be considered in a landscape conservation 

context. The risk of spoiling the impression of pristine wilderness is 

high. Background studies in the field combined with careful planning can 

reduce such impacts on the landscape. Landscape aspects are also the most 

important when dealing with potential effects on the tourism industry. 

Greenlandic tourism's main asset – its unspoilt nature – is readily made 

much less attractive by buildings, infrastructure and other facilities. 

10.3.4 Noise/Disturbance 

Noise from drilling and the positioning of machinery is described under the 

exploration heading (section 2.2). These activities continue during the development 

and production phase, supplemented by noise from many other activities. 

If several production fields are active in the waters west of, for example, 

Nuuk town, the impacts of noise particularly on the occurrence of cetaceans 

must be addressed. Bowhead whales in the Beaufort Sea avoided 

close proximity (up to 50 km) to oil rigs, which has been shown to result in 

significant loss of summer habitat (Schick & Urban 2000). This could be a 

problem for some of the baleen whale stocks in the assessment area. 

One of the more significant sources of noise during development and production 

is ships and helicopters used for intensive transport operations 

(Overrein 2002). Ships and helicopters are widely used in the Greenland environment 

today, but the level of these activities is expected to increase significantly 

in relation to development of one or more oil fields within the assessment 

area. Supply ships will sail between offshore facilities and coastal 

harbours. Shuttle tankers will sail between crude oil terminals and the transshipment 

facilities on a regular basis, even in winter. The loudest noise levels 

from shipping activity come from large icebreakers, particularly when 

they operate in ramming mode. Peak noise levels may then exceed the ambient 

noise level up to 300 km from the sailing route (Davis et al. 1990). 

Ship transport (incl. ice-breaking) has the potential to displace marine 

mammals, particularly if the mammals associate negative events with the 

noise; and in this respect fin whales, minke whales, white whales, narwhals 

and walruses which are hunted from motor boats will be expected to be particularly 

sensitive (whaling for bowhead whales and humpback whales has 

recently re-started). Also seabird concentrations may be displaced by regular 

traffic. The impacts can be mitigated by careful planning of sailing routes. 

Helicopters produce a strong noise which can scare marine mammals as well 

as birds. Particularly walruses hauled out on ice are sensitive to this activity, 

and there is risk of displacement of the walruses from critical feeding 

grounds. Walruses have a narrow foraging niche restricted to the shallow

parts of the shelf. Activities in these areas may displace the walruses to 

suboptimal feeding grounds or to coastal areas where they are more exposed 

to hunting. The main habitats for walruses overlap with the northern part of 

the assessment area. 

Seabird concentrations are also sensitive to helicopter flyovers. The most 

sensitive species is thick-billed murre at breeding sites. They will often 

abandon their nests for long periods of time, and when scared away from 

their breeding ledges they often push eggs or small chicks off the ledge, resulting 

in a failed breeding attempt (Overrein 2002). There are only few 

breeding colonies of thick-billed murre within the assessment area (Fig. 

4.7.1), and only one is situated on the outer coasts over which helicopters 

may pass en route to offshore installations. Concentrations of feeding birds 

may also be sensitive, as they may lose feeding time due to the disturbance. 

Flying in Greenland both with fixed-wing aircraft and helicopters is regulated 

in areas with seabird breeding colonies (order of 8 March 2009 on protection 

and hunting of birds). In the period 15 April to 15 September a distance 

to colonies of thick-billed murre and a number other species has to be > 3000 

m both horizontally and vertically, while the distance to other colonies 

(common eider, Arctic tern etc) has to be 200 m. 

Flying in relation to mineral exploration is also regulated by special field 

rules issued by the Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum. These rules encompass 

areas with staging and moulting geese, areas with moulting seaducks, 

etc. 

The effects of disturbance of moulting seaducks can be mitigated by applying 

specific flight altitudes and routes, as many birds will habituate to regular 

disturbances as long as these are not associated with other negative impacts 

such as hunting (Burger 1998). 

Offshore construction activities, such as blasting, have the potential to produce 

behavioural disturbance and physical damage among marine mammals, 

particularly cetaceans (Ketten 1995, Nowacek et al. 2007). Off Newfoundland, 

Ketten et al. (1993 in Gordon et al. 2003), in Gordon et al. (2003), 

found damage consistent with blast injury in the ears of humpback whales 

trapped in fishing gear after blasting operations in the area. In this case, the 

blasting did not provoke obvious changes in behaviour among the whales, 

even though it may have caused severe injury, suggesting that whales may 

not be aware of the danger posed by loud noise. Such impacts are, however, 

local and will mainly be a threat on an individual level. 

10.3.5 Air emissions 

The large amounts of greenhouse gases released from an oil field will increase 

the total Greenland emission significantly. The CO2 emission from 

Statfjord in Norway (Section 2.8), for example, is twice the total current 

Greenland CO2 emission, which in 2008 was 685,500 tonnes (Nielsen et al. 

2010). Such amounts will have a significant impact on the Greenland greenhouse 

gas emission in relation to the Kyoto Protocol (to the United Nations 

Framework Convention on Climate Change) and it successor. Another very 

active greenhouse gas is methane (CH4), which is released in small amounts 

together with other VOCs from produced oil during trans-shipment or from 

vented gas. 

201

202 

Another matter is the contribution of greenhouse gases from combustion of 

the oil produced, which depending on the amounts will contribute to the 

global increase of CO2 in the atmosphere. 

Emissions of SO2 and NOx contribute, among other effects, to acidification 

of precipitation and may impact particularly on nutrient-poor vegetation 

types inland far from the release sites. The large Norwegian field Statfjord 

emitted almost 4,000 tonnes NOx in 1999. In the Norwegian strategic EIA on 

petroleum activities in the Lofoten-Barents Sea area, NOx emissions even 

from a large-scale scenario were considered to have an insignificant impact 

on the vegetation on land. However, it was also considered that there was 

no knowledge about tolerable deposition of NOx and SO2 in Arctic habitats 

where nutrient-poor habitats are widespread (Anon 2003b). This lack of 

knowledge also applies to the terrestrial environment of the assessment area. 

Emission of black carbon (BC) from combustion is another matter especially 

of concern in the Arctic, because the black particles reduce albedo from 

snow and ice surfaces increasing the melt. Emission of BC is particularly 

problematic when using heavy fuel oil. Use of this, however, is not permitted 

in Greenland waters in relation to oil activities, and only low-sulphur (< 

1.5% by weight) gas oils may be used. 

The international Convention on Long-Range Transboundary Air Pollution 

(LRTAP) includes all the above emissions, but when Denmark signed the 

protocols covering NOx and SO2 some reservations were made in the case of 

Greenland. 

10.3.6 Cumulative impacts 

Cumulative impacts are changes to the environment that are caused by an 

action in combination with other past, present and future human actions. 

Impacts from a single activity can be insignificant, but the sum of impacts 

from the same activity carried out at many sites at the same time and/or 

over time can develop to be significant. Cumulative impacts also include interactions 

with other human activities impacting the environment, such as 

hunting and fishing; moreover, climate change is also often considered in 

this context (Anon 2003a). 

An example could be many seismic surveys carried out at the same time in a 

restricted area. A single survey will leave many alternative habitats available, 

but extensive activities in several locations may exclude, for instance, baleen 

whales from key habitats. This could reduce their food uptake and their 

fitness due to decreased storage of the lipids needed for the winter migration 

and breeding activities. 

The concentration of oil discharged within produced water is low. But the 

amounts of produced water from a single production platform are considerable, 

and many platforms will release even more. 

Bioaccumulation is an issue of concern when dealing with cumulative impacts 

of produced water. The low concentrations of PAH, trace metals and 

radionuclides all have the potential to bioaccumulate in fauna on the seafloor 

and in the water column. This may occur in the benthic population and 

subsequently be transferred to the higher levels of the food web, i.e. seabird 

and marine mammals feeding on benthic organisms (Lee et al. 2005).

Seabird hunting is widespread and intensive in West Greenland and some of 

the seabird populations have been declining, mainly due to unsustainable 

harvest. In particular, common eider and thick-billed murre colonies in and 

near the assessment area have decreased in numbers over the past decades. 

Both species rely on a high adult survival rate, giving the adult birds many 

seasons to reproduce. Tighter hunting regulations were introduced in 2001, 

which has resulted in fewer birds being reported shot. The common eider 

population has been recovering since 2001 (Merkel 2010a), while the murre 

population is still decreasing in several of the colonies in West Greenland. 

Extra mortality due to an oil spill or sublethal effects caused by contamination 

from petroleum activities have the potential to be additive to the hunting 

impact and thereby enhance the population decline (Mosbech 2002). 

Within the assessment area the breeding colonies of thick-billed murres have 

declined considerably. Thick-billed murres are particularly vulnerable during 

the swimming migration, which is performed by flightless adults (due to 

moult) and chicks still not able to fly. This migration was studied in the Disko 

Bay in 2005 and 2006, and similar studies have been initiated in Qaanaaq 

in 2007. 

10.3.7 Mitigating impacts from development and production 

Based on previous experience, e.g. from the North Sea, the Arctic Council 

guidelines (PAME 2009) recommend that discharges are as far as possible 

prevented. When water-based muds are employed, additives containing oil, 

heavy metals, or other bioaccumulating substances should be avoided or criteria 

for the maximum concentrations should be established (PAME 2009). 

Only chemicals registered in HOCNF and the Danish product register PRO- 

BAS should be allowed, and only those which are classified by OSPAR as 

‘green’ (PLONOR) or ‘yellow’. Moreover, wherever possible, ‘zero discharge 

of drilling waste and produced water’ should be applied. This can be obtained 

by application of new technologies, such as injection and cuttings reinjections 

(CRI). In the Arctic offshore Oil and Gas Guidelines it is requested 

that ‘discharge (of drilling waste) to the marine environment should be considered 

only where zero discharge technology or re-injection are not feasible’ 

(PAME 2009). 

If zero-discharge is not possible, releases to the marine environment asca 

minimum should follow the standards described by OSPAR, applying 

sound environmental management based on the Precautionary Principle, 

Best Available Techniques (BAT) and Best Environmental Practice (BEP). 

Based on knowledge concerning site-specific biological, oceanographic and 

sea-ice conditions, discharges should occur at or near the seafloor or at a 

suitable depth in the water column, to prevent large sediment plumes. Such 

plumes have the potential to affect benthic organisms, plankton and productivity 

and may also impact higher trophic levels such as fish and mammals. 

The discharges should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis. 

In the Barents Sea of Norway cuttings and drilling muds are not discharged 

(except top hole drilling, which usually is carried out with sea water as drilling 

fluid) due to environmental concerns; instead they are re-injected in 

wells or brought to land (Anon 2003b): This, however, gives rise to increased 

emissions to air from transport and pumping. 

203

204 

Disturbance can be mitigated by careful planning of the noisy activities in 

order to avoid activities in sensitive areas and periods, based on detailed 

background studies of the sensitive components of the environment. 

Impacts from placement of structures inland is best mitigated by the same 

measures as described for activities involving disturbance, i.e. careful planning 

based on detailed background studies of the sensitive components of 

the environment in order to avoid unique and sensitive habitats. 

10.3.8 Conclusions on development and production activities 

Drilling will continue during development and production phases and drilling 

mud and cuttings will be produced in much larger quantities than during 

exploration. If these substances are released to the seabed impacts must 

be expected on the benthic communities near the release sites. Therefore 

strict regulation based on toxicity tests of the mud chemicals and monitoring 

of effects on the sites is essential in order to mitigate impacts. 

However, the release giving most reason for environmental concern is produced 

water. Recent studies have indicated that the small amounts of oil and 

nutrients can impact birds and primary production, and there is also concern 

with regard to the long-term effects of radionuclides and hormonedisruptive 

chemicals. These effects should be mitigated by regulation, monitoring 

of the sites and new technologies to clean the water. 

There will be a risk of release of non-native and invasive species from ballast 

water, and this risk will increase with the effects of climate change, unless 

new regulations, such as the Ballast Water convention, will secure that the 

ballast water is cleaned prior to release. The risk of introducing new species 

by means of fouling on ship hulls is also likely to increase along with increased 

shipping in the Arctic. 

Emissions from production activities to the atmosphere are substantial and 

will contribute significantly to the Greenland contribution of greenhouse 

gases. 

Drilling, ships and helicopters produce noise which can affect marine 

mammals and seabirds. The most sensitive species within the assessment area 

are the colonial seabirds, bowhead whales, narwhals and white whales. 

There is a risk of permanent displacement of populations from critical habitats 

and therefore for negative population effects. 

Placement of structures both has biological and aesthetic impacts. Biological 

impacts mainly include permanent displacement from critical habitats – 

walrus is highly sensitive and occurs at the northern part of the assessment 

area. Destruction of unique seabed communities, such as sponge gardens 

and cold water coral reefs, is also a risk. Aesthetic impacts primarily include 

impacts on the pristine landscape, which may impact on the local tourism 

industry. 

The commercial fishery may be affected by closure zones if rigs, pipelines 

and other installations are placed in the Greenland halibut fishing grounds. 

But the impact on the fishery will probably be relatively low. Fish and seals 

that are attracted to artificial reefs created by subsea structures may be exposed 

to the contaminants from the release of produced water.

There is a risk of reduced availability of hunted species, because they can be 

displaced from traditional hunting grounds. 

In general, the best way of mitigating impacts from development and production 

activities is to combine a detailed background study of the environment 

(in order to locate sensitive ecosystem components) with careful planning 

of structure placement and transport corridors. Then BEP, BAT and 

applying international standards such as OSPAR and HOCNF can do much 

to reduce emissions to air and sea. A discharge policy, as planned for the 

Barents Sea, can contribute substantially to minimising impacts. Furthermore, 

monitoring of effects on the sites is essential. 

10.4 Decommissioning 

Impacts from decommissioning activities are mainly from noise at the sites 

and from traffic, assuming that all materials and waste are taken out of the 

assessment area and deposited at a safe site. There will also be a risk of pollution 

from accidental releases. However, decommissioning activities are 

short term and careful planning and adoption of BAT, BEP and international 

standards would minimise impacts. 

An important issue to address in the planning phase is to design installations 

for easy removal when activities are terminated. 

205

206 

11 Impacts from accidental oils spills 

Flemming Merkel, David Boertmann, Anders Mosbech (AU), Fernando Ugarte 

(GINR), Doris Schiedek, Susse Wegeberg & Kasper Johansen (AU) 

11.1 Oil spills 

A serious issue of environmental concern from hydrocarbon activities in the 

marine Arctic environment is a large oil spill (Skjoldal et al. 2007). The probability 

of such an event is low and in general the global trend in amounts of 

spilled oil is decreasing (Schmidt-Etkin 2011). But the impacts from a large 

spill can be severe and long lasting especially in northern areas. 

Several circumstances enhance the potential for severe impacts of a large oil 

spill in the assessment area. The Arctic and sub-Arctic conditions reduce the 

degradation of oil, prolonging potential effects. The occurrence of ice, at 

least in winter, may influence the distribution and fate of oil (see below), and 

will also make oil spill response difficult in periods with extensive ice coverage 

or otherwise harsh weather conditions. 

According to the AMAP oil and gas assessment tankers are the primary potential 

spill source (Skjoldal et al. 2007). Another potential source is spills 

from a blowout during drilling, which in contrast to tanker spills are continuous 

and may last for many days; for example, the Deepwater Horizon 

blowout lasted 106 days before it was stopped by relief drilling. 

11.1.1 Probability of oil spills 

Large oil spills are generally very rare incidents. However, the risk is present 

and cannot be eliminated. In relation to oil drilling in the Barents Sea, it has 

been calculated that the possibility of a blowout between 10,000 and 50,000 

tonnes would happen once every 4,600 years in a small-scale development 

scenario and once every 1,700 years in an intensive development scenario 

(Anon 2003b). The likelihood of a large oil spill from a tanker ship accident 

is estimated to be higher than for an oil spill from a blowout (Anon 2003b). 

Drilling in deep waters (between 1000 and 5000 feet ~ 305-1524 m) and ultradeep 

waters (> 5000 feet ~ 1524 m) increases the risk for a long-lasting oil 

spill, due to the high pressures encountered in the well and due to difficulties 

in operating at these depths. It took three months to cap the Macondo 

well (Deepwater Horizon spill), partly because of the deep water (1500 m) 

(Graham et al. 2011). 

11.1.2 The fate and behaviour of spilled oil 

Previous experience with spilled oil in the marine environment gained in 

other parts of the world shows that fate and behaviour of the oil are highly 

variable. Fate and behaviour depend on the physical and chemical properties 

of the oil (light oil or heavy oil), how it is released (surface or subsea, instantaneous 

or continuous) and on the conditions of the sea into which it is 

spilled (temperature, ice, wind and current).

General knowledge on the potential fate and degradation of spilled oil relevant 

for the Greenland marine environments has been reviewed by 

Pritchard & Karlson (in Mosbech 2002). Ross (1992) evaluated the behaviour 

of potential offshore oil spills in West Greenland with special regard to the 

potential for cleanup. Simulations of oil spill trajectories in West Greenland 

waters have previously been performed by Christensen et al. (1993) using 

the SAW model and by SINTEF (Johansen 1999) using the OSCAR model in 

preparation for the Statoil drilling in the Fylla area in 2000. More recently 

DMI simulated oil spill drift and fate in the Disko West area (Nielsen et al. 

2006), in eastern Baffin Bay (Nielsen et al. 2008), in South Greenland 

(Ribergaard et al. 2010) and presently they are working on simulation of 

subsurface spills in the deep waters off South Greenland. Updated oil spill 

drift scenarios for the eastern Davis Strait have not yet been developed. 

Surface spills 

Oil released to open water surfaces spreads rapidly resulting in a thin slick 

(often about 0.1 mm in the first day) that covers a large area. Wind-driven 

surface currents move the oil at approx. 3% of the wind speed and cause 

turbulence in the surface water layer, which breaks the oil slick up into 

patches and causes some of the oil to disperse in the upper water column. 

This dispersed oil will usually stay in the upper 10 m (Johansen et al. 2003). 

Low temperatures and the presence of sea ice can hamper the process of 

dispersal considerably, and the complexity of an oil spill in ice can be much 

larger than a similar oil spill in open water. 

The oil spill simulations have generally addressed surface spills and the subsequent 

drift. However oil may also sink to the seabed, depending on the 

density of the oil spilled. Even light oil may sink if it adsorbs onto sediment 

particles in the water (Hjermann et al. 2007). Sediment particles are frequently 

seen in coastal Greenland surface waters where meltwater from the glaciers 

can disperse widely into the open sea. 

Subsurface spills 

Blowouts on a platform will initially cause a surface spill, but may continue 

as a subsurface spill if the rising drill tubes from the wellhead collapse. The 

risk of a collapse is higher in deeper water. The oil in a subsurface blowout 

can float to the surface or remain for a longer time in the water column. The 

oil that remains in the water column will typically initially be dispersed in 

small droplets. Whether oil in a subsea blowout remains in the water column 

as a dispersed plume or floats to the surface depends on oil type, 

oil/gas ratio, temperature and water depth. As the potential oil type and 

oil/gas ratio is unknown for the assessment area, the behaviour of the oil 

cannot be predicted with any certainty. This is why DMI have modelled 

subsurface spills in West Greenland which quickly float to the surface 

(Nielsen et al. 2006), while SINTEF modelled subsurface spills which would 

not reach the surface at all but rather form a subsea plume at a depth of 300- 

500 m (Johansen 1999). High total hydrocarbon concentrations (> 100 ppb by 

weight) were estimated in an area close to the outflow. 

The Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Mexican Gulf in 2010 was unusual in 

size, location and duration (though similar to the Ixtoc blowout in 1979, also 

in the Mexican Gulf), and revealed new and undescribed ways spilled oil 

could be distributed in the environment (which probably was also the case 

during the Ixtoc spill) (Jernelöv 2010). The unusual dispersion of the oil was 

mainly caused by the spill site being on the seabed in waters more than 1500 

207

208 

m deep. Dispersants were applied at the wellhead and huge subsea plumes 

of dispersed oil were formed in different depths and they moved long distances 

with the water currents (Diercks et al. 2010, Thibodeaux et al. 2011). 

Oil also settled on the ocean floor far from the spill site (Schrope 2011). The 

Deepwater Horizon oil spill has been estimated at 840,000 oil tonnes, making 

it the largest recorded peacetime spill. The oil dispersed at the wellhead and 

had a very slow buoyant migration towards the surface, which allowed volatile 

hydrocarbon to be dissolved in the water column. Adding of dispersants 

at the wellhead contributed to the formation of huge plumes of dispersed 

oil at different depths ranging between 800 and 1,200 m (Hazen 2010, 

Valentine 2010). It is estimated that 50% of the oil ‘remains’ dispersed, has 

sunk to the seabed or has degraded in the water column (Kerr 2010). 

Studies of deepwater blowout events have predicted that a substantial fraction 

of the released oil and gas would become suspended in pelagic plumes, 

and that this may take place even in the absence of added dispersant agents 

(Johansen et al. 2001). The fate of oil in deep water is likely to be very different 

from that of surface oil because processes such as evaporative loss and 

photooxidation do not take place (Joye & MacDonald 2010). Microbial oxidation 

and perhaps sedimentation on the seabed are the primary fates expected 

of the oil suspended in the deep sea (Joye & MacDonald 2010). In the 

Gulf of Mexico, natural oil seeps contribute to the marine environment with 

an estimated 140,000 tonnes of oil annually (Kvenvolden & Cooper 2003), 

which means there should be intrinsic potential for microbial degradation 

(i.e. presence of the responsible organisms) (Hazen 2010). This was confirmed 

by bio-degradation rates faster than expected in the deep plumes at 

5° C. 

However, microbial degradation of oil may have derived effects such as oxygen 

depletion, which in the deep water may persist for long periods of 

time, because deep water oxygen is not replenished in situ by photosynthesis 

as it is in surface waters (Joye & MacDonald 2010). 

There are indications of unexpected and severe deep-sea impacts (Schrope 

2011). However, at the time of writing the environmental impacts are not really 

understood or described (Graham et al. 2011), (Schrope 2011) and therefore 

it has not been possible to include clear conclusions in this SEIA. But a 

natural resource damage assessment is under preparation (Graham et al. 

2011) and the consequences of the Deepwater Horizon subsea blowout will 

be discussed in more detail in a later version of this assessment. 

11.1.3 Dissolution of oil and toxicity 

Total oil concentration in water is a combination of the concentration of 

small dispersed oil droplets and oil components dissolved from these and 

the surface slick. The process of dissolution is of particular interest as it increases 

the bioavailability of the oil components. The toxic components can 

increase the potential for acute toxicity to marine organisms. The rate and 

extent to which oil components dissolve in seawater depends mainly on the 

amount of water-soluble fractions (WSF) in the oil. The degree of natural 

dispersion is also important for the rate of dissolution; although surface 

spreading and water temperature may also have some influence. 

PAHs are among the toxic components of crude oil. The highest PAH concentration 

found in the water column in Prince William Sound within a six-

week period after the Exxon Valdez spill was 1.59 ppb, at a depth of 5 m. 

This is well below levels considered to be acutely toxic to marine fauna 

(Short & Harris 1996). 

SINTEF (Johansen et al. 2003) reviewed available standardised toxicity studies 

and found acute toxicity down to 0.9 mg oil /l (0.9 ppm or 900 ppb) and 

applied a safety factor of 10 to reach a PNEC (Predicted No Effect Concentration) 

of 90 ppb oil for 96-hour exposure. This is based on fresh oil which 

leaks a dissolvable fraction, most toxic for eggs and larvae. Weathered oil 

will be less toxic. 

The concentrations of oil in the waters at the Deepwater Horizon blowout in 

the Mexican Gulf in 2010 published to date were > 50 µg/l (50 ppb) BTEX 

(benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene, constituting only a fraction of 

the oil) measured in a subsea plume of oil 16 km from the well site (Camilli 

et al. 2010) and total PAH concentrations up to 189 µg/l near the well site 

(Diercks et al. 2010). The latter study found PAH concentrations associated 

with acute toxicity in discrete depth layers between 1000 and 1400 m extending 

at least as far as 13 km from the wellhead. 

Water-soluble components (WSC) could leak from oil encapsulated in ice. 

Controlled field experiments with oil encapsulated in first-year ice for up to 

5 months have been performed in Svalbard, Norway (Faksness & Brandvik 

2005). The results show that the concentration of water-soluble components 

in the ice decreases with ice depth, but that the components could be quantified 

even in the bottom ice core. A concentration gradient as a function of 

time was also observed, indicating migration of water-soluble components 

through the porous ice and out into the water through the brine channels. 

The concentration of water-soluble components in the bottom 20 cm ice core 

was reduced from 30 ppb to 6 ppb in the experimental period. Although the 

concentrations were low, exposure time was long (nearly four months). This 

might indicate that the ice fauna are exposed to a substantial dose of toxic 

water-soluble components and at least in laboratory experiments with seaice 

amphipods sublethal effects have been demonstrated (Camus & S. 2007, 

Olsen et al. 2008). Leakage of water-soluble components to the ice is of special 

interest due to the high bioavailability to marine organisms, relevant 

both in connection with accidental oil spills and release of produced water. 

11.2 Oil spill impacts on the environment 

There are generally two types of effects from oil in the marine environment: 

physical contact (e.g. with bird plumage and fish eggs) and intoxication 

from ingestion, inhalation and contact. Contact gives acute effects, while intoxication 

can give both acute and long-term (sublethal) effects. 

Table 11.2.1 gives an overview of potential impacts from a large oil spill. 

209

Table 11.2.1. Overview of potential impacts of a large oil spill on VECs in the Davis Strait assessment area. See section 4.9 for 

a summary of the VECs. This assessment assumes the application of current (2011) mitigation guidelines, see text for details. 


210 



Pelagic hotspots halibut larvae - moderate (L) moderate (R) 

Tidal/subtidal zone capelin, bivalves long term (L) major (L) major (L) 

sandeel, Gl. halibut, shrimp, shelf 

Demersal fish & offshore benthos short term (L) 

bank benthos 

moderate (L) moderate (L) 

Seabirds (breeding) auks, c. eiders short term (L) major (R) major (R) 

Seabirds (non-breeding) auks, eiders, harlequins short term (L) major (R) major (R) 

Marine mammals (summer) baleen- & toothed whales short term (L) moderate (R) minor (R) 

bowheads, hooded seals, 

Marine mammals (winter) 

walruses, narwhals 

* L = local, R = regional and G = global 

short term (L) moderate (R) moderate (R) 

11.2.1 Oil spill impact on plankton and fish incl. larvae of fish and 

crustacean 

Adult fish and shrimp 

In the open sea, an oil spill at the surface will usually not result in oil concentrations 

that are lethal to adult fish, due to dispersion and dilution. Furthermore, 

many fish can detect oil and will attempt to avoid it, and therefore 

populations of adult fish in the open sea are not likely to be significantly affected 

by an oil spill. The situation is different in coastal areas, where high 

and toxic oil concentrations can build up in sheltered bays and fjords resulting 

in high fish mortality (see below). 

Adult shrimps live on and near the bottom in relatively deep waters (100- 

600 m), where oil concentrations from a surface spill will be very low, if detectable 

at all. No effects were seen on the shrimp stocks (same species as in 

Greenland) in Prince William Sound in Alaska after the large oil spill from 

Exxon Valdez in 1989 (Armstrong et al. 1995). Under certain conditions, a 

subsea blowout may cause high concentrations of oil and dispersants in the 

water column, as observed during the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010 

(Thibodeaux et al. 2011). Shrimp habitats can therefore be affected. 

Fish and crustacean larvae 

Eggs and larvae of fish and shrimp are more sensitive to oil than adults. 

Theoretically, impacts on fish and crustacean larvae may be significant and 

reduce the annual recruitment strength with some effect on subsequent 

populations and fisheries for a number of years. However, such effects are 

extremely difficult to identify/filter out from natural variability and they 

have never been documented after spills. 

The distribution of fish eggs and early larval stages in the water column is 

governed by density, currents and turbulence. In the Barents Sea the pelagic 

eggs of cod will rise and be distributed in the upper part of the water column. 

As oil is also buoyant, the highest exposure of eggs will be under calm 

conditions while high energy wind and wave conditions will mix eggs and 

oil deeper into the water column, where both are diluted and the exposure 

limited. As larvae grow older their ability to move around becomes increasingly 

important for their depth distribution.

In general, species with distinct spawning concentrations and with eggs and 

larvae in distinct geographic concentrations in the upper water layer will be 

particularly vulnerable. The Barents Sea stock of Atlantic cod is such a species, 

where eggs and larvae can be concentrated in the upper 10 m in a limited 

area. Based on oil spill simulations for different scenarios and different 

toxicities of the dissolved oil, individual oil exposure and population mortality 

have been calculated for the Barents Sea stock of Atlantic cod. The population 

impact is to a large degree dependent on whether there is a match or a 

mismatch between high oil concentrations in the water column (which will 

only occur for a short period when the oil is fresh) and the highest egg and 

larvae concentrations (which will also only be present for weeks or a few 

months, and just be concentrated in surface water in calm weather). For 

combinations of unfavourable circumstances and using the PNEC with a 10 

X safety factor (Johansen et al. 2003), there could be losses in the region of 

5%, and in some cases up to 15%, for a blowout lasting less than two weeks, 

while very long-lasting blowouts could give losses of eggs and larvae in excess 

of 25%. A 20% loss in recruitment to the cod population is estimated to 

cause a 15% loss in the cod spawning biomass and it would take approx. 

eight years for the population to recover fully. 

Hjermann et al. (2007) reviewed the impact assessment of the Barents Sea 

stock of Atlantic cod, herring and capelin by Johansen et al. (2003) and suggested 

improvements by emphasising the need for more focus on oceanographic 

and ecological variation in the modelling. It was also emphasised 

that it is not possible to draw conclusions about on long-term effects due to 

the variability in the ecosystem. At best, we can attempt, by modelling, to attain 

a quantitative indication of the possible outcomes of oil spills in the ecosystem 

context. Qualitatively, we can assess at which places and times an oil 

spill may be expected to have the most significant long-term effects. 

Compared with the Lofoten Barents Sea area, there is much less knowledge 

available on concentrations of eggs and larvae in West Greenland, including 

the assessment area. However, the highly localised spawning areas of cod 

with high concentrations of eggs and larvae for a whole stock near the surface 

seen in the Lofoten-Barents Sea do not currently occur in West Greenland. 

However, there have been spawning grounds of cod in West Greenland 

during the past century and recolonisation by cod of the assessment area 

is possible. Currently, the cod fishery in Southwest Greenland is highly 

influenced by recruitment from Icelandic spawning grounds. Occasionally, 

significant quantities of offspring from Iceland are transported with the 

Irminger current to Greenland waters. 

Eggs of Atlantic cod concentrate in the upper 10 m of the water column, 

whereas larvae of shrimp and Greenland halibut are found deeper and 

would therefore be less exposed to harmful oil concentrations from an oil 

spill at the surface. This implies that an oil spill would most likely impact a 

much smaller proportion of a season’s production of eggs and/or larvae of 

these species than modelled for cod in the Barents Sea. Impacts on recruitment 

to Greenland halibut and northern shrimp stocks would therefore 

most likely be insignificant. However, a subsea blowout with the properties 

and quantities of the Deepwater Horizon spill in 2010, when huge plumes of 

dispersed oil occurred in the water column, may expose eggs and larvae 

over much larger areas and depth ranges, and potentially impact the recruitment 

and stock size of these bottom-living species. 

211

212 

Besides Greenland halibut and northern shrimp, a subsea blowout may have 

consequences for snow crab and sandeel. Sandeel is a key species in the ecosystem 

in the assessment area and the potential effects of oil spills on this 

species should be further investigated in new background study programmes 

prior to an updated version of this report. With respect to Greenland 

halibut, snow crab and shrimp, the assessment area is among the most 

important fishing grounds in Greenland, implying that consequences for the 

fishing industry could be high if larvae concentrations are exposed to a major 

subsea oil spill. For Greenland halibut the assessment area is known as 

the main spawning ground in the Northwest Atlantic, and fish from important 

fishing grounds in the Davis Strait, Baffin Bay, eastern Canada and 

inshore waters in Northwest Greenland are recruited from this area. Recent 

studies suggest that eggs and larvae drift slowly though the assessment area 

at 13-40 m depths (Simonsen et al. 2006). 

Copepods, the food chain and important areas 

Copepods are very important in the food chain and can be affected by the 

toxic oil components (WSF, PAH) in the water below an oil spill. However, 

given the usually restricted vertical distribution of these components to the 

upper zone during surface oil spills, and the wider depth distribution of the 

copepods, a spill at the surface is not likely to cause major population effects. 

Ingestion of dispersed oil droplets at greater depth from a subsea blowout or 

after a storm may be a problem. Studies of the potential effects of oil spills 

on copepods in the Barents Sea (Melle et al. 2001) showed that populations 

were distributed over such large areas that a single surface oil spill would 

only impact a minor part and not pose a major threat (Anon 2003a). Recent 

studies showed negative effects of pyrene (PAH) on reproduction and food 

uptake among Calanus species (Jensen et al. 2008b), and on survival of females, 

feeding status and nucleic acid content in Microsetella spp. from western 

Greenland (Hjorth & Dahllöf 2008). Also negative effects of combined 

temperature changes and PAH exposure on pellet production, egg production 

and hatching of C. finmarchicus and C. glacialis were demonstrated 

(Hjorth & Nielsen 2011). 

Again, the experience learned from the Macondo oil spill, where huge subsea 

plumes of dispersed oil were found at different depths, may change these 

conclusions of relatively mild impacts to more acute and severe impacts 

for large subsea spills. 

Important areas for plankton including fish and crustacean larvae are often 

where hydrodynamic discontinuities occur. Special attention should therefore 

be given to the implication of oil spills in connection with such sites, 

particularly during the spring bloom. Fronts, upwelling areas and the marginal 

ice zone are examples of such hydrodynamic discontinuities where 

high surface concentrations of phytoplankton, zooplankton, including 

shrimp and fish larvae, can be expected. Except for the shelf banks, however, 

very little information is available on such events in the assessment area. 

The most sensitive season for primary production and plankton – i.e. where 

an oil spill can be expected to have the most severe ecological consequences 

– is the spring plankton bloom, when high biological activity of the pelagic 

food web from phytoplankton to fish larvae is concentrated in the surface 

layers.

A study of the density and distribution of chlorophyll (as a measure of primary 

productivity) in the Disko Bay area in spring 2006 (Mosbech et al. 

2007) indicated wide spatial and temporal variability in chlorophyll levels 

and that high chlorophyll levels (spring bloom) are distributed over large 

areas. Moreover, areas of high importance for primary production vary both 

between seasons and between years, depending for example on ice conditions. 

An oil spill therefore has at least the potential to impact small and localised 

primary production sites, while primary production as a whole will 

only be slightly impacted even during a large spill in open waters. Additional 

information about primary productivity is available for the area 

around Nuuk, including Fyllas Banke (Greenland Climate Center), and this 

information should be included in an updated version of this assessment. 

11.2.2 Oil spill impacts on benthic flora 

The direct impact of an oil spill is an expected mass mortality among 

macroalgae and benthic invertebrates on oiled shores from a combination of 

chemical toxicity and smothering. Another more subtle way oil spill can impact 

algae is by petroleum hydrocarbons interfering with the sex pheromone 

reaction, as observed in the life history of Fucus vesiculosus (Derenbach & 

Gereck 1980). 

There are different reports on the impact of oil contamination on macroalgal 

vegetation and communities. After the Exxon Valdez oil spill in 1989 in 

Alaska macroalgae cover in the littoral zone (mainly Fucus gardneri) was lost. 

It has taken many years to fully re-establish these areas with years with fluctuations 

in Fucus cover, and some areas are still considered as recovering 

(NOAA 2010). These fluctuations may be a result of the grazer-macroalgae 

dynamics, as was shown after the Torrey Canyon accident off the coast of 

Cornwall, UK (Hawkins et al. 2002). For Prince William Sound the fluctuations 

were considered to be a result of the homogeneity of the evolving Fucus 

population (e.g., genetics, size and age), which made it more vulnerable 

to natural environmental impacts (e.g., no adult Fucus plants to protect and 

assure recruitment), and resulted in a longer time span for Fucus population 

heterogeneity to recover (Driskell et al. 2001). 

In contrast, no major effects were observed in a study on the impact of crude 

and chemically dispersed oil on shallow sublittoral macroalgae at northern 

Baffin Island, conducted by Cross et al. (1987). 

The scenarios of the Exxon Valdez accident and the Baffin Island Oil Spill 

(BIOS) study differ in that the Exxon Valdez oil spill included heavy oil, 

while in the case of BIOS the oil tested was a medium crude oil (Sergy & 

Blackall 1987). Furthermore, the BIOS studies on macroalgae were conducted 

in the upper sublittoral, and not in the littoral zone where the most dramatic 

impacts were observed in connection with the Exxon Valdez oil spill 

(Dean & Jewett 2001). 

Cleaning of the shoreline may add to the impacts of oil contamination. After 

the Exxon Valdez oil spill adult Fucus plants were coated with oil but did not 

necessarily die. Part of the cleanup effort involved washing shores with 

large volumes of high-pressure hot seawater. This treatment caused almost 

total mortality of adult Fucus and probably scalded much of the rock surface 

and thereby Fucus germlings. In the long term, though, no significant difference 

was observed on Fucus dynamics at oiled and unwashed versus oiled 

213

214 

and washed sites (Driskell et al. 2001). Use of dispersants in cleaning up oil 

spills, as has been practised in earlier years, may increase recovery time of 

the treated shores. Recovery lasted from 2-3 years to at least 10 years after 

the Torrey Canyon spill off southern England, and up to 15 years on shores 

badly affected by dispersants (Hawkins et al. 2002). 

How pyrene might affect natural algae and bacteria communities in Arctic 

sediment was studied near Sisimiut (West Greenland) using microcosms. 

Benthic microalgae were especially sensitive to pyrene and increased toxicity 

was found at high levels of UV light already at low pyrene concentrations 

(Petersen & Dahllöf 2007, Petersen et al. 2008). The pronounced pyrene effects 

caused algal death and organic matter release, which in turn stimulated 

bacterial degradation of organic matter. 

11.2.3 Oil spill impacts on benthic fauna 

Bottom-living organisms (benthos) are generally very sensitive to oil spills 

and high hydrocarbon concentrations in the water. The sensitivity of many 

benthic species have been studied in the laboratory and a range of sublethal 

effects have been demonstrated from exposures not necessarily comparable 

to actual oil spill situations (Camus et al. 2002a, Camus et al. 2002b, Camus 

et al. 2003, Olsen et al. 2007, Bach et al. 2009, Hannam et al. 2009, Bach et al. 

2010, Hannam et al. 2010). 

Effects will occur especially in shallow water (< 50 m) where toxic concentrations 

can reach the seafloor. In such areas intensive mortality has been recorded 

following an oil spill, for example among crustaceans and molluscs 

(McCay et al. 2003a, McCay et al. 2003b). Oil may also sink to the seafloor as 

tar balls, which happened after the Prestige oil spill off northern Spain in 

2002. No effects on the benthos were detected (Serrano et al. 2006), but the 

possibility of an impact is apparent. Sinking of oil may also be facilitated by 

suspended sediment particles, frequently seen in Greenland waters where 

meltwater runoff from glaciers may disperse widely into the open sea. 

Effects on benthos have been documented from the Macondo subsea blowout 

in the Gulf of Mexico in 2010 where deepwater plumes moved tens of 

kilometres away from the blowout site (Diercks et al. 2010, Schrope 2011, 

Thibodeaux et al. 2011), but it is too early to draw firm conclusions. 

Many benthos species, especially bivalves, accumulate hydrocarbons, which 

may cause sublethal effects (e.g. reduced reproduction). Such bivalves may 

act as vectors of toxic hydrocarbons to higher trophic levels, particularly 

bearded seals, walruses and eider ducks. Knowledge on benthos in the assessment 

area is too fragmentary to assess impacts of potential oil spills. The 

impact of potential oil spills on benthos in the assessment area has not yet 

been assessed in detail. 

However, in broad terms, the shallow water (down to 50 m) communities 

have high species richness (bivalves, macro algae etc.) and the fauna is 

available to higher trophic levels such as eiders and walruses. Another feature 

is that individuals of several species have an estimated maximum age of 

more than 25 years (the bivalves, Mya spp., Hiatella arctica, Chlamys islandica 

and the sea urchin Strongylocentrotus droebachiensis). This indicates that the 

benthic communities may be very slow to recover after any type of disturbance 

that causes mortality of these old individuals that often constitute the

majority of the biomass. From a biodiversity perspective the high prevalence 

of species found at only one site and of species represented only by a single 

specimen also suggests that mortality induced from disturbance from oil 

spills or exploration can potentially cause a significant reduction in the total 

species richness for a long period of time. 

11.2.4 Oil spill impacts on ice habitats 

There is very little knowledge available on oil spill impact on the sea-ice ecosystem 

(Camus & S. 2007, Skjoldal et al. 2007). Oil may accumulate under 

the ice and stay until break-up and melt; weathering processes are inhibited 

which means that the toxicity may persist much longer than in open waters. 

See also section 11.1.3 above. 

At least in laboratory experiments with sea-ice amphipods sublethal effects 

of exposure to WSF have been demonstrated on sea-ice fauna (Camus & 

Olsen 2008, Olsen et al. 2008). Polar cod have also been exposed to PAHs 

and crude oil, both in the field and laboratory, and several sublethal effects 

were demonstrated. Moreover polar cod seems to be a suitable indicator 

species in relation to monitoring pollution effects caused by oil (Nahrgang et 

al. 2009, Christiansen et al. 2010, Jonsson et al. 2010, Nahrgang et al. 2010a, 

Nahrgang et al. 2010b, Nahrgang et al. 2010c, Nahrgang et al. 2010d). 

The sympagic ecosystem is however very resilient as it necessarily has to reestablish 

each season when new ice is formed, at least in areas dominated by 

first-year ice. 

It is apparent that polar cod could be particularly sensitive, due to the fact 

that their eggs stay for a long period just below the ice, where also oil would 

accumulate (Skjoldal et al. 2007). 

11.2.5 Oil spill impacts in coastal habitats 

One of the lessons learned from the Exxon Valdez oil spill was that the nearshore 

areas were the most impacted habitats (NOAA 2010). Many of the animal 

populations from this habitat are assessed to have recovered (birds, 

fish), but certain populations are still in recovery (several bird species, clams, 

mussels) and a few were recently assessed as ‘not recovered’ (pigeon guillemot 

– a close relative to the black guillemot in Greenland, and also Pacific 

herring) (NOAA 2010). 

In coastal areas where oil can be trapped in shallow bays and inlets, oil concentrations 

can build up in the water column to levels that are lethal to adult 

fish and invertebrates (e.g., McCay 2003). 

An oil spill from an activity in the assessment area which reaches the coast 

has the potential to reduce stocks of capelin and lumpsucker, because these 

fish spawn here and the sensitive eggs and larvae may be exposed to high 

oil concentrations. Arctic char may be forced to stay in oil contaminated 

shallow waters when they assemble before they move up into their native 

river to spawn and winter. Other fish species that can be affected in coastal 

waters include Atlantic halibut (Hippoglossus hippoglossus), capelin, lumpsucker 

and local populations of Atlantic cod. 

215

216 

In coastal areas where oil may be buried in sediment, among boulders and 

imbedded in crevices in rocks, a situation with chronic oil pollution may 

persist for decades and cause small to moderate effects. Many coastal areas 

in the assessment area are similar in morphology to those of Prince William 

Sound, where oil was trapped below the surface after the Exxon Valdez oil 

spill. 

In a study performed 12 years after the oil spill it was estimated how much 

oil remained on the beaches of Prince William Sound. Oil was found on 78 of 

91 beaches, selected randomly and according to their oiling history. The 

analysis revealed that over 90% of the surface oil and all of the subsurface oil 

originated from the Exxon Valdez (Short et al. 2004). Today (2010) oil still 

lingers in buried patches on the affected shores, and this may represent a 

source of continued exposure to oil for sea otters and birds that seek food in 

sediments (NOAA 2010). 

Oil may also contaminate terrestrial habitats occasionally inundated at high 

water levels. Salt marshes are particularly sensitive and they represent important 

feeding areas for geese. During the Braer spill in the Shetland Islands 

oil-containing spray carried by wind even impacted fields and grasslands 

close to the coast. 

The tourism industry may be impacted by a large oil spill hitting the coasts. 

Tourist travelling to Greenland to encounter the pristine, unspoilt Arctic 

wilderness will most likely avoid oil-contaminated areas. 

The coastal areas have been mapped and classified according to their sensitivity 

to oil spills (Mosbech et al. 2000). 

11.2.6 Oil spill impacts on fisheries 

Tainting (unpleasant smell or taste) of fish flesh is a severe problem related 

to oil spills. Fish exposed even to very low concentrations of oil in the water, 

in their food or in the sediment where they live, may be tainted, leaving 

them useless for human consumption (GESAMP (GESAMP 1993, Challenger 

& Mauseth 2011). The problem is most pronounced in shallow waters, where 

high oil concentrations can persist for longer periods. Flatfish and bottomliving 

invertebrates are particularly exposed. Tainting has, however, not 

been recorded in flatfish after oil spills in deeper offshore waters, where 

degradation, dispersion and dilution reduce oil concentrations to very low 

levels. Tainting may also occur in fish living where oil-contaminated drill 

cuttings have been disposed of. 

A very important issue in this context is the reputational damage an oil spill 

will cause to fish products from the affected areas. It will therefore be necessary 

to suspend fishery activities in an affected area, to avoid even the risk of 

marketing contaminated products (Rice et al. 1996, Challenger & Mauseth 

2011, Graham et al. 2011). This problem may apply to the large-scale commercial 

northern shrimp and Greenland halibut fisheries within the assessment 

area, as well as to the local fisheries targeting Atlantic cod, lumpsucker, 

capelin, wolfish and Atlantic halibut. Large oil spills may cause 

heavy economic losses due to problems arising in the marketing of the 

products. Strict regulation and control of the fisheries in contaminated areas 

are therefore necessary to ensure the quality of the fish available on the market. 

In offshore areas suspension usually lasts some weeks and in coastal

waters longer. The coastal fishery was banned for four months after the 

Braer incident off the Shetland Islands in 1993, and for nine months after the 

Exxon Valdez incident in Alaska in 1989 (Rice et al. 1996). However, some 

mussel and lobster fishing grounds were closed for more than 18 and 20 

months, respectively, after the Braer incident. During the Deepwater Horizon 

spill in September 2010, 230,000 km 2 were closed for both commercial 

and recreational fishing and in September 2010 approx. 83,000 km 2 were still 

closed (Graham et al. 2011). Some fisheries remained closed one year after 

the spill (Law & Moffat 2011, NOAA 2011a). 

The offshore fisheries for Greenland halibut within the assessment area constitute 

a significant proportion of the overall Greenland/Canada fishery in 

Davis Strait. In 2010, half the Davis Strait landings were caught in the assessment 

area (14,000 tons, Jørgensen 2010). The main offshore fishing 

grounds are located west of Nuuk (Fig. 5.1.3). Closing the fishery in this area 

could therefore have socio-economic impacts. There is a risk that closure 

zones could extend further west and also cover Canadian fishing grounds. 

This is because Greenland halibut moves considerable distances over a very 

short time, and contaminated (tainted) fish may move out of the assessment 

area and be caught far from a spill site. 

11.2.7 Oil spill impacts on seabirds 

It is well documented that birds are extremely vulnerable to oil spills in the 

marine environment (Schreiber & Burger 2002). Birds which rest and/or dive 

from the sea surface, such as auks, seaducks, cormorants and divers 

(loons), are more exposed to floating oil than birds which spend more time 

flying and on land. But all seabirds face the risk of coming into contact with 

spilled oil on the surface. This particular vulnerability is attributable to their 

plumage. Oil soaks easily into the plumage and destroys its insulation and 

buoyancy properties. Therefore, oiled seabirds readily die from hypothermia, 

starvation or drowning. Birds may also ingest oil by cleaning their 

plumage and by feeding on oil-contaminated food. Oil irritates the digestive 

organs, damages the liver, kidney and salt gland function, and causes anaemia. 

Sublethal and long-term effects may result. However, the main cause of 

seabird losses following an oil spill is direct oiling of the plumage. 

Many seabirds aggregate in small and limited areas for certain periods of 

their life cycles. Even small oil spills in such areas may cause very high mortalities 

among the birds present. The high concentrations of seabirds found 

on coasts, e.g. breeding colonies, wintering areas or in offshore waters at 

important feeding areas, are particularly vulnerable. 

Oiled birds which have drifted ashore are often the focus of media attention 

when oil spills occur and demonstrate the high individual sensitivity to oil 

spills. However, of greater concern must be the case where whole populations 

suffer from oiling. To assess this issue, extensive studies of the natural 

dynamics of affected populations and the surrounding ecosystem are necessary. 

The seabird species most vulnerable to oil spills are those with low reproductive 

capacity and a corresponding high average lifespan (low population 

turnover). Such a life strategy is found among auks, fulmars and many seaducks. 

Thick-billed murres (an auk), for example, do not breed before they 

reach 4–5 years of age and the females only lay a single egg per year. This 

217

218 

very low annual reproductive output is counterbalanced by a very long expected 

life of 15–20 years or more. These seabirds are therefore particularly 

vulnerable to additional adult mortality caused, for example, by an oil spill. 

If a breeding colony of birds is completely wiped out by an oil spill it must 

be recolonised from neighbouring colonies. Recolonisation is dependent on 

the proximity, size and productivity of these colonies. If the numbers of 

birds in neighbouring colonies are declining, for example due to hunting, 

there will be no or only few birds available for re-colonisation of a site. 

Breeding birds 

A large number of seabird species breed in the assessment area (see section 

4.7.5) and the majority are associated with habitats along the outer coastline 

(sea-facing cliffs or on low islets), which are highly exposed to drifting oil. 

Such exposed areas are almost inaccessible to oil spill response due to remoteness 

and often harsh weather conditions. A further risk situation is 

when adults swim away from the colony accompanying their chicks, e.g. 

auks and seaducks. Some will move further inshore to find sheltered areas; 

others (e.g. murres, being flightless) will move offshore and disperse over 

extensive areas. Two of the species breeding in the assessment area, Atlantic 

puffin and common murre, are rare breeders to Greenland and listed as near 

threatened or endangered, respectively, on the Greenland Red List, while 

two other species, Iceland gull and white-tailed eagle (subspcies), are endemic 

to Greenland (Boertmann 2007). The two auk species are also colonial 

breeders, which mean that a large proportion of the Greenland population 

risk being wiped out by a single oil spill. 

Staging, moulting and wintering birds 

A large oil spill in the assessment area may potentially affect seabirds from 

many areas of the North Atlantic, due to Southwest Greenland being an international 

important foraging area throughout most of the year. The visitors 

include non-breeding birds from Europe and the southern hemisphere 

(e.g., black-legged kittiwakes and great shearwaters, respectively), moulting 

birds from Canada (e.g., harlequin ducks) and wintering birds from a range 

of breeding areas in the North Atlantic (e.g., murres). Just in the coastal area 

of Southwest Greenland, the number of wintering birds is estimated to be 

more than 3.5 million and a very large proportion of these are found within 

the assessment area. In addition, king eiders utilise the shallow water offshore 

on banks and an unknown but large number of murres, puffins, kittiwakes 

and especially little auks utilise areas further offshore (Boertmann et 

al. 2004, Boertmann et al. 2006). A large number of eiders, murres and little 

auks are also assumed to pass through the assessment area when migrating 

back and forth to breeding areas in the northern Baffin Bay or eastern Canada 

(Mosbech et al. 2006a, Mosbech et al. 2006b, Mosbech et al. 2007, 

Boertmann et al. 2009). The number of birds potentially affected by a large 

oil spill in the assessment area could therefore be extensive. On their northwards 

spring migration through the Davis Strait, murres and little auks are 

assumed to follow the ice edge of the western pack ice, where also oil will 

tend to accumulate in case of a spill. 

11.2.8 Oil spill impacts on marine mammals 

Marine mammals are relatively robust and can generally survive short periods 

of fouling and contact with oil, except for polar bears and seal pups, for 

whom even short exposures can be lethal (Geraci & St. Aubin 1990).

Seal pups are very sensitive to direct oiling, because they have not developed 

an insulating blubber layer and are dependent on their natal fur for insulation 

(Geraci & St. Aubin 1990). The hooded seal is particularly sensitive 

in this respect because whelping patches are located within the assessment 

area, on the eastern edge of the Davis Strait pack ice. For the polar bear, contact 

with oil also means loss of the insulation properties of the fur. Polar 

bears can pick up the oil when they swim between ice floes and may also 

unavoidably ingest oil as part of the grooming behaviour; both can be lethal. 

In the assessment area, however, the number of polar bears is low and their 

occurrence is dependent on the presence of sea ice. 

Marine mammals are forced to come to the surface to breathe. Therefore inhalation 

of vapours from oil is a potential hazard to seals and cetaceans. AA 

recent report indicates that the loss of killer whales after the Exxon Valdez 

oil spill in 1989 was related to inhalation of oil vapours from the spill 

(Matkin et al. 2008). These killer whales did not avoid the oil spill and were 

observed surfacing in oil-covered water. Harbour seals found dead shortly 

after the Exxon Valdez oil spill had evidence of brain lesions caused by oil 

exposure, and many of these seals were disoriented and lethargic over a period 

of time before they died (Spraker et al. 1994). In periods with icecoverage 

where oil can fill the spaces between the ice floes, the risk of inhalation 

of toxic vapour may be even more serious because marine mammals 

are forced to surface in these ice-free spaces where the oil may be gathering. 

There is also concern relating to damage to eye tissue on contact with oil as 

well as for the toxic effects and injuries in the gastrointestinal tract if oil is 

ingested during feeding at the surface (Albert 1981, Braithwaite et al. 1983, 

St. Aubin 1990). Surface feeding whales such as the bowhead, minke, fin, sei, 

blue and humpback whales are especially exposed to this threat. Furthermore, 

baleen whales are at risk during even short exposures to oil because 

they feed by filtering prey-laden water through their baleen plates. The effect 

of fouling of baleen plates by oil and the long-term effects are uncertain, 

but filtration may be seriously affected (Werth 2001). 

Risk of long exposures, such as inhalation of oil vapours, ingestion and contact 

with eye tissues, is aggravated because animals may not be able to perceive 

oil as a danger and have repeatedly been reported to swim directly into 

oil slicks (e.g., Harvey & Dalheim 1994, Smultea & Würsig 1995, Anon 

2003a, Matkin et al. 2008). 

As top predators, marine mammals have a risk of being affected through 

toxic substances accumulating in the food chain. Walrus is especially sensitive 

because they feed on bivalves buried in the seabed in shallow waters 

where toxic concentrations of oil can reach the seafloor. Bearded seals are also 

vulnerable, as their diet includes benthic organisms such as polychaetes, 

bivalves and sea cucumbers. 

Marine mammals species affected by an oil spill during winter in the assessment 

area could include bearded seal, hooded seal, ringed seal, harbour 

seal, bowhead whale, narwhal, white whale, polar bear, harbour porpoise 

and occasionally also walrus, bottlenose whale and sperm whale. Harbour 

seals are especially vulnerable because they are endangered in Greenland 

and conservation of the remnant populations still existing in the assessment 

area is crucial for the recovery of the population. As previously mentioned, 

the hooded seal is also highly vulnerable due to whelping patches on the 

219

220 

eastern edge of the Davis Strait pack ice. Marine mammals common in the 

area during summer include harp seal, hooded seal, ringed seal, harbour 

seal, fin whale, humpback whale, minke whale, sei whale, harbour porpoise, 

white beaked dolphin, bottlenose whale, sperm whale, and pilot whale. Blue 

whale occurs only rarely in the assessment area, but is vulnerable due to a 

very small population and the survival of single individuals is important for 

the recovery of the population. 

Assessing oil-related mortality of marine mammals is difficult as carcasses 

are rarely found in conditions suitable for necropsies. Nevertheless, increased 

mortality of killer whales, sea otters and harbour seals exposed to 

the Exxon Valdes event in Prince William Sound has been well documented 

(e.g., Spraker et al. 1994, Matkin et al. 2008). In the Gulf of Mexico, the rate of 

stranded cetaceans increased after the Deepwater Horizon event in 2010, 

from a 2003-2007 mean observed rate of 17 standings per year to 101 in 2010. 

Both numbers are expected to represent only a small fraction (approx. 2%) of 

the true death toll (Williams et al. 2011). 

The banks on the shelf of the assessment area are important feeding grounds 

for seals and baleen whales. If the prey species are contaminated with toxic 

substances after an oil spill this may affect the top-predators relying on this 

feeding area. 

11.2.9 Long-term effects 

A synthesis of 14 years of oil spill studies in Prince William Sound since the 

Exxon Valdez spill has been published in the journal ‘Science’ (Peterson et 

al. 2003), and here it is documented that delayed, chronic and indirect effects 

of marine oil pollution occur. Oil persisted in certain coastal habitats beyond 

a decade in surprisingly high amounts and in highly toxic forms. The oil was 

sufficiently bio-available to induce chronic biological exposure and had 

long-term impacts at the population level. Heavily oiled coarse sediments 

formed subsurface reservoirs of oil, where they were protected from loss 

and weathering in intertidal habitats. In these habitats e.g. harlequin ducks, 

preying on intertidal benthic invertebrates, showed clear differences between 

oiled and unoiled coasts. On oiled coasts they displayed the detoxification 

enzyme CYP1A nine years after the spill. Harlequin ducks on oiled 

coasts displayed lower survival, their mortality rate being 22% instead of 

16%; body mass was smaller; and they showed a decline in population density 

as compared with stable numbers on unoiled shores (Peterson et al. 

2003). The oil still lingers in the environment and both the harlequin duck 

and other populations of coastal birds are still assessed as ‘recovering’ 

(NOAA 2010). 

Long-term chronic effects of oil on marine mammals can include decreased 

survival and lowered reproductive success (NOAA 2011b). In the first year 

after the 1989 Exxon Valdez spill, a well-known group of local killer whales 

experienced a 41% loss; there has been no reproduction since the spill 

(Matkin et al. 2008). The cause of the apparent sterility is unknown, but this 

case shows that immediate death is not the only factor that can lead to longterm 

loss of population viability. 

Many coasts in the assessment area in West Greenland have the same morphology 

as the coasts of Prince William Sound, where oil was trapped. This

indicates that similar long-term impacts must be expected in the assessment 

area if spilled oil strands on the coasts. 

Another indication of long-term effects was seen 17 months after the Prestige 

oil spill off northern Spain in November 2002. Increased PAH levels 

were found in both adult gulls and their nestlings, indicating not only exposure 

from the residual oil in the environment, but also that contaminants 

were incorporated into the food chain, because nestlings would only have 

been exposed to contaminated organisms through their diet (e.g. fishes and 

crustaceans) (Alonso-Alvarez et al. 2007, Perez et al. 2008). 

11.2.10 Mitigation of oil spills 

Risk of oil spills and their potential impact can be minimised with high HSE 

standards, BAT, BEP and a high level of oil spill response. However, the latter 

is difficult during winter due to harsh weather conditions and, in parts of 

the assessment area, ice prevents effective oil recovery methods. 

An important tool in oil spill response planning and implementation is oil 

spill sensitivity mapping, which has been carried out in the assessment area 

but should be updated (Mosbech et al. 2000). See also the following section, 

11.3. 

A supplementary way to mitigate the potential impact on animal populations 

that are sensitive to oil spills, e.g. seabirds, fish and marine mammals, 

is to try to manage populations by regulation of other population pressures 

(such as hunting), so that they are fitter and better able to compensate for extra 

mortality due to an oil spill. 

Before activities are initiated, provision of information to local societies, both 

on a regional and local scale, is very important. In the context of mitigating 

impacts, information on activities potentially causing disturbance should be 

communicated to e.g. local authorities and hunters’ organisations as hunters 

may be impacted, for example, by the displacement of important quarry 

species. Such information may help hunters and fishermen to plan their activities 

accordingly. 

11.3 Oil spill sensitivity mapping 

The coast of the assessment area has been mapped according to its sensitivity 

to oil spills (Mosbech et al. 2000). This atlas integrates all available 

knowledge on coastal morphology, biology, resource use and archaeology. It 

also classifies coastal segments of approx. 50 km in length according to their 

sensitivity to marine oil spills. This classification is shown on map sheets, 

and other map sheets show coastal type, logistics and proposed oil spill 

countermeasure methods. Extensive descriptions of ice conditions, climate 

and oceanography are also included. 

An overview of the sensitivity classification of the coastlines in the assessment 

area is shown in Figure 11.3.1. A large proportion of the coastline is 

classified as highly or extremely sensitive to oil spills, especially in the central 

and northern part of the assessment area. It should be noted that this 

sensitivity atlas (Mosbech et al. 2000) was published 10 years ago and production 

of an updated version which incorporate the new information is 

recommended. 

221

Figure 11.3.1. Oil spill sensitivity 

of coastlines in the assessment 

area according to the oil spill 

sensitivity atlas (Mosbech et al. 

2000). 

222 

66°N 

64°N 

60°W 

Shoreline sensitivity 

Ranking 

Extreme 

62°N 

High 

Moderate 

Low 


0 50 100 Km 

55°W 

11.3.1 Seasonal summary of offshore oil spill sensitivity 

55°W 

In relation to this assessment classification of offshore areas is particularly 

relevant and this has been updated with the newest available data (Figures 

11.3.2). The offshore areas were defined on the basis of a cluster analysis in 

order to obtain ecologically meaningful areas, and the four seasons were calculated 

separately. The cluster analysis included twelve variables: air temperature, 

air pressure, sea surface temperature (two different measurements), 

temperature at a depth of 30 m, salinity at the surface and at 30 m in 

depth, wind speed, ice coverage, sea depth, slope of seabed and distance to 

coast (for details see Mosbech et al. 2004b). 

For each season and offshore area various symbols are shown in Figure 

11.3.2 for important species or species groups according to their relative 

abundance. For each season the relative sensitivity to oil spill is calculated 

for each offshore area, ranging from low to extreme sensitivity. This classification 

is based on the relative abundance of resources, but also species specific 

sensitivity values, an oil residency index, a human use factor and a few 

50°W 

50°W 

68°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N

other parameters. It should be notede that the sensitivity ranking shown in 

figure 11.3.2 is relative for each season and therefore cannot be directly 

compared between seasons. 

A direct comparison of seasons for the assessment area, based on absolute 

sensitivity values and averaged across all offshore areas, shows that winter 

is most sensitive to oil spill (index value 48), closely followed by spring and 

autumn (both value 46), while summer is least sensitive to oil spill (value 

36). One general reason that winter, spring and autumn are relatively more 

sensitive than summer, is the large number of wintering/migrating seabirds, 

which all are very sensitive to oil (especially auks and seaducks). For more 

details see the seasonal description below. 

Spring (April/May-June) 

Depending on the winter conditions the ice edge of the western pack ice 

may still be present in the northern and western part of the assessment area, 

but in early May there is normally open water throughout the area. As the 

sea ice also disintegrates and retreats elsewhere, large numbers of wintering 

auks and seaducks start migrating out of the assessment area towards breeding 

areas north, west or east of Southwest Greenland. Large numbers of surface 

feeders (kittiwakes and fulmars) which winter further south also pass 

through the assessment area on their way to breeding colonies further north. 

While many bird species leave or pass through the assessment area during 

spring, baleen whales move in from the south to use the assessment area as 

part of their summer foraging area. They take advantage of the productive 

upwelling areas of the banks and prey on items such as krill, capelin and 

sandeels, which are especially important for the whales. Also in spring, large 

schools of capelin and lumpsucker move towards the coasts, where they 

spawn in the intertidal zone. This attracts both seabirds and marine mammals. 

The sensitivity classification of the offshore areas (Fig. 11.3.2) shows that the 

near-coastal offshore areas are classified as highly sensitive or extremely 

sensitive to oil spills during spring. This is mainly due to the large numbers 

of wintering/migrating birds and extensive human use. Especially the fishery 

for northern shrimp and snow crab is important in the near-coastal offshore 

blocks, but also hunting and small-scale fisheries. The offshore block 

in the southwest corner of the assessment area is also classified as highly 

sensitive to oil spill due to the extensive Greenland halibut fishery (Fig. 

5.1.3) and whelping areas for hooded seals in the western pack ice in March 

and April. 

Summer (July-August) 

For many of the same reasons as mentioned above for the spring period, baleen 

whales, human use of northern shrimp and snow crab and seabirds, the 

near-coastal offshore areas are classified as highly sensitive or extremely 

sensitive to oil spills during summer (Fig. 11.3.2); although relatively less 

than during the other seasons (see above). Even though most wintering 

birds now have left the assessment area, there is still a variety of breeding 

birds (around 20 species), which largely forage in offshore areas. In addition, 

over-summering (non-breeding) seabirds utilise the shelf areas and other 

non-breeding seabirds utilise near-coastal areas during moulting. 

223

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

58°W 

0 

K 

; 

5 

4 

H 2EL 

9 

B A 

> 

@ N 

224 

58°W 

Significant species 

occurrences 

De Al De Sc 

K 

Ba 

5 

Gh 

; 4 

De Iv 

Al Alcids 

Ba Baleen whales 

De Deep sea shrimps 

Gh Greenland halibuts 

Iv Ivory gulls 

Na Narwhales 

No Non-alcid pursuit divers 

Pb Polar bears 

Sc Scallops 

Se Seaducks 

Sl Seals 

Su Surface feeders 

Wa Walrusses 

Wh White whales 

Hu Human use 

Sensitivity ranking 

Extreme 

High 

Moderate 

B 

Low 

0 50 100 Km 

Sl 

; 

De 

0 50 100 Km 

58°W 

58°W 

56°W 

56°W 

0 A56°W 9 0 A 

Al 

5 

Gh 

Su 

N 

Hu 

B 

Sl 

56°W 

0 

Al 

N 

Hu 

@ 

Wh 

5 

Gh 

N 

Hu 

Al 

De 

K ; 

Ba De 

0 

Al 

54°W 

Se Al Su 

0 

; 

N 

Hu 

A 

5 

Gh 

54°W 

Su 

54°W 

N 

Hu @Wh 

; 

N 

Hu 

Se 

Al 

De 

9 

0 

Al 

2 

No 

N 

Hu 

K 

Ba 

; 

De 

9Se 

0 

Al 

A 

Su 

2 

N N K 

Hu 

; K 

De Ba 

0 

Al 

Hu Ba 

; 9 

De Se 

A 0 

Su Al 

No 2 

N 9Se 

HuA 

K0 

Su 

Ba 2 Al 

4 

Iv 

0 

Al 

A 

Su 

K 

Ba 

; 

De 

54°W 

2 

No 

No 

N K 

Hu Ba 

; 9 

De 

A 

Su 

Se 

0 

Al 

Se 

No 

N K 

K 

Ba 

Hu Ba 

; 

; 

De 

0 

Al 

De 

9Se 

0 

9Se 

Al 

2 

A 

No 

A 

52°W 

52°W 

Hu 

Su 

9Se 

Su 

N A 

N 0 

Hu Al 

; De 

; 

9Se 

De 

9 

A 

52°W 

52°W 

Su 

Autumn 

Su 

50°W 

Spring 

50°W 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

50°W 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

50°W 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

A 2 

Su 56°W 

No 

K 

Ba 

5 

0 50 100 Km 

58°W 

58°W 

56°W 

B 

Gh 

5 ; 

Gh 

0 50 100 Km 

Sl 

De 

; 

De 

N 

Hu 

5 

Gh 

N 

Hu 

K 

Ba 

N 

Hu 

N 4 

Hu Iv 

B 5 

; 

De 

2 

N 

Hu 

K 

Ba 

; 

0 

2 

A 

N N K 

Hu 

K ; 

Hu 

; 

Ba 

9 

54°W 

> Wa @Wh 

; 0 

De Al 

Ba 

54°W 

De 

Al 

De 

N > Hu Wa 

@Wh 

; 

N 

Hu 

; 

De 

A 

De 

L 

Sc 

9 

Se 

No 

0 

Al 

0 

Al 

Su 

De 

A 

Su 

A 2 

Su 

0 

N 

K ; 

No 

Ba 

Se 

Al 

N 0 

Hu Al 

; De 9Se 

A 2 

Su No 

N 

0 

De 

; 

K 

Hu De 

52°W 

; 

52°W 

0 

Ba 

N 

Hu 9Se 

K A 

9 

Se 

; 

De 

9 

Ba Su 

0 

Al 

N 0 Hu Al 

9 A Se 

9 

2 

Summer 

Figure 11.3.2. Oil spill sensitivity of offshore areas in the assessment area partly based on and further developed from the oil 

spill sensitivity atlas (Mosbech et al. 2000). Symbols for species or species groups relate to their relative abundance, while the 

sensitivity ranking also includes other parameters, such as species-specific oil sensitivity, oil residency and human use. 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

58°W 

58°W 

56°W 

Sl 

56°W 

Gh 

Sc 

No 

54°W 

Se 

Su 

54°W 

Hu 

Al 

De 

Al 

52°W 

52°W 

Se 

Se 

Su 

Su 

A 

Su 

A 

No 

50°W 

50°W 

Winter 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

50°W 

66°N 

64°N 

62°N 

50°W

Autumn (September-November) 

During autumn the near-coastal offshore areas are still classified as the most 

sensitive areas (high or extreme) with respect to oil spills (Fig. 11.3.2). Auks 

and seaducks from a variety of breeding locations now return to the assessment 

area, boost bird densities and add to the human use factor. The baleen 

whales gradually start their migration southwards, but densities remain 

high throughout most of the period. The northern shrimp and snow crab 

fishery is still important. 

During autumn also the middle offshore block in the south is classified as 

highly sensitive to oil spills. This is mainly due to a large influx of auks 

(murres, little auks and puffins) and surface feeders (shearwaters, kittiwakes 

and fulmars). 

Winter (December-April) 

In general, winter is the most sensitive period among seasons when considering 

absolute sensitivity values and averaged across all offshore areas in the 

assessment area. As mentioned above, this is highly influenced by the large 

number of oil-sensitive seabirds overwintering in the assessment area. 

Once again, the near-coastal offshore areas classify as some of the more sensitive 

blocks within the season (Fig. 11.3.2). In addition to use by seabirds, 

human use is extensive throughout the period (seabird hunting, northern 

shrimp and snow crab fishery) and the wintering area for beluga whales extends 

into the northeastern offshore block. During cold winters the southern 

areas become increasingly important as the western pack ice may force animals 

to the south. 

As in spring, the offshore block in the southwest corner of the assessment 

area is classified as highly sensitive to oil spill. Again the extensive Greenland 

halibut fishery (Fig. 5.1.3) and the whelping area for hooded seals in the 

western pack ice during March and April are the main contributors to the 

sensitivity index. 

225

226 

12 Preliminary identification of information 

needs and knowledge gaps for 

environmental management and 

regulation of oil activities in Davis Strait 

Anders Mosbech (AU) & Fernando Ugarte (GINR) 

12.1 Knowledge gaps 

In the Davis Strait several knowledge gaps need to be filled in order to: a) 

assess, plan and regulate activities so the risk of impacts are minimized; b) 

identify the most sensitive areas, and c) provide a baseline for ‘before and after’ 

studies in case of impacts from large accidents. Moreover, climate 

change in the Arctic is rapid, altering the ecological conditions and demanding 

long-term studies and monitoring to understand the ecosystem dynamics 

and the effects of human activities. Long time series are invaluable and a 

coordinated long-term monitoring programme should be considered. A 

programme of this kind could take advantage of existing monitoring of utilised 

species and of international standards being developed by the Circumpolar 

Biodiversity Monitoring Programme under the Arctic Council’s Commission 

for the Conservation of Arctic Flora and Fauna (CAFF). 

Below is an annotated list of the main information needs and knowledge 

gaps identified in relation to hydrocarbon activities in the Davis Strait assessment 

area. This list is not exhaustive; new gaps may appear, for example 

when the implications of climate change become more apparent. 

Some knowledge gaps are specific to the assessment area while others are 

generic to oil activities in the Arctic, cf. the Arctic Council's Oil and Gas Assessment 

(Skjoldal et al. 2007). The latter should be addressed by cooperative 

international research, and participation by Greenland can secure that specific 

Greenland perspectives are included. The most important of these are 

also listed below. 

12.1.1 Specific knowledge gaps for the assessment area 

Location of recurrent offshore hot spots for biological productivity and 

biodiversity 

Relevance: These hot spots include recurrent (predictable) areas with localised 

(in time and space) primary production, high concentrations of fish and 

shrimp larvae, zooplankton, seabirds and marine mammals. The sites are 

sensitive to oil spills and possibly release of produced water (formation water 

with oil residues discharged during oil production). 

Methods: Surveys, remote sensing and modelling of oceanographic data. 

Shrimp larvae and snow crab larvae distribution, drift and settling in the 

Davis Strait 

Relevance: The northern shrimp fishery is the single most important industry 

in Greenland and snow crab is also an important fishery. The larvae move 

passively in the upper part of the water column, where they can be exposed

to oil spills and produced water. It is important to identify recruitment areas 

and recurrent concentrations including the larvae depth distribution. 

Methods: Studies of the early life history of northern shrimp and snow crab, 

including larval drift, variation in settling and occurrence of benthic stages 

and interaction with climate change. Dedicated field studies and modelling. 

Benthic flora and fauna – identification of sensitive areas and baseline 

(diversity, spatial variation, biomass, primary production) 

Relevance: Benthic flora and fauna is sensitive to oil spills, to placement of 

structures and to release of drilling mud. Sponge gardens and cold-water 

coral reefs are especially sensitive to sedimentation of drilling mud and cuttings. 

Sensitive benthic areas are important to consider when subsea activities 

are to take place and when drilling locations are identified. For shore 

habitats (sub tidal and intertidal zone) knowledge on benthic flora and fauna 

is especially important for identification of the most oil spill sensitive areas, 

where shoreline protection measurements can potentially be established 

during an oil spill. 

Methods: Dedicated regional (strategic) field surveys in combination with the 

studies carried out by the licence holders during site surveys. 

Fish – biology, spawning areas, stock relationships of important species (esp. 

Greenland halibut, capelin, sandeel, lumpsucker, Atlantic cod) 

Relevance: Fish, especially egg and larvae, can be sensitive to oil spills and 

produced water and fish can be tainted if there are oil components in the 

sediment. Adult fish can be displaced by acoustic activities, such as seismic 

surveys, and this displacement can influence stock recruitment if spawning 

fish are scared away from optimal spawning areas. 

Methods: Dedicated surveys, tagging, modelling and other methods for identification 

of important spawning sites, including the depth at which spawning 

occurs, larval drift and retention areas with high concentrations of larvae. 

This is especially pertinent for Greenland halibut, for which the main 

spawning grounds are in the central Davis Strait, and for species that spawn 

in coastal areas where oil concentrations are more likely to be high during an 

oil spill. Behavioural and physiological experiments on the reaction of selected 

local fish to sound from seismic surveys. 

Seabirds – distribution and abundance of breeding and wintering birds, migratory 

movements and concentrations, population delineation and population 

dynamics, especially for declining or less known species 

Relevance: Seabirds are very sensitive to oil spills and knowledge of seabird 

concentration areas is important to mitigate impacts. The assessment area is 

an internationally important key wintering area for seabirds from all over 

the North Atlantic. 

Methods: Surveys and ecological studies in breeding colonies. Tracking of 

migrating birds by satellite telemetry, and geo-locators, bio-loggers, and molecular 

techniques combined with dedicated surveys by ship and aircraft (in 

combination with the hot-spot studies listed above). 

227

228 

Marine mammals – distribution and abundance, relationship to sea ice, 

stock identity and movement, general biological knowledge of less known 

species and of endangered species 

Relevance: Marine mammals are sensitive to oil spills and to anthropogenic 

noise. To mitigate impacts and understand the consequences of these impacts 

it is important to know where marine mammals are, why they are 

there and what their status is. 

Methods: Tracking by means of satellite transmitters and bio-loggers, dedicated 

surveys, passive acoustic monitoring, molecular studies and markrecapture 

(tags, biopsies or photo-ID, depending of species). 

Marine mammals – reactions to noise from drilling and seismic studies 

Relevance: Marine mammals are sensitive to noise and there is a risk of displacement 

from critical habitats especially for whales if there is a cumulative 

impact from concurrent activities in several licence blocks. Knowledge on 

reaction distance and the potential for habituation to noise is important. 

Methods: Field studies, passive acoustic monitoring, satellite tracking. 

12.2 Knowledge gaps generic to the arctic 

The effects of oil and different oil components on marine organisms have to 

some degree been studied in laboratories. However, effects in the field and 

especially in the Arctic are less well known and because the Arctic food web 

is dependent on a few key species, effects on these would be very relevant to 

study in order to assess and mitigate potential impacts. Assessment criteria 

and adequate monitoring strategies should be established. 

Below some important issues that should be addressed before production 

activities are initiated in Greenland are listed. Some of these should be addressed 

by international research cooperation. Many relate to how spills and 

releases behave and impact organisms under Arctic conditions. 

In relation to oil spills some important issues to address include: 

• Biological effects and sensitivity to PAHs and other oil components of 

key species (e.g. sandeel, capelin) under Arctic conditions 

• Rate of degradation of oil and chemicals in Arctic water and sediment 

• Oil vapours and their effects on marine mammals. 

Similar issues relating to produced water are: 

• Fate, behaviour and toxicity of produced water in cold and ice-covered 

waters 

• Biological effects and sensitivity of key species (e.g. sandeel, capelin) to 

the different components of produced water. 

Interaction of contaminants: 

• There are knowledge gaps concerning the interactions between impacts 

of oil related pollution and other contaminants such as POPs and heavy 

metals in relevant species living in the assessment area. Integrated studies 

on these issues are needed.

12.2.1 Ecotoxicological Monitoring 

Assessment criteria have to be established when using biological indicators 

to assess whether there is an unacceptable impact from discharges. These 

will be based on ecotoxicological tests that cover the sensitivity range of relevant 

species at different trophic levels. To establish such environmental assessment 

criteria (EAC) toxicological tests have to be developed or adapted 

using relevant species from the Davis Strait. Knowledge concerning species’ 

sensitivity, assessment criteria as well as an adequate monitoring strategy 

should be developed. 

12.3 Proposal for a new environmental study programme 

Based on this preliminary SEIA for the Davis Strait assessment area DCE 

and GINR propose to develop a strategic environmental study programme 

for the area to strengthen the knowledge base for planning, mitigation and 

regulation of oil activities. The study programme will include an updated 

SEIA and Oil Spill Sensitivity Atlas. 

229

230 

13 References 

ACIA (2005). Impacts of a warming Arctic: Arctic Climate Impact 

Assessment (ACIA). Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK. 

Acquarone M, Born E, Speakman J (2006). Walrus (Odobenus rosmarus) field 

metabolic rate measured by the doubly labeled water method. Aquatic 

Mammal 32: 363-369. 

Akvaplan-niva, Acona (2003). Muligheder for og konsekvenser ved 

deponering av borekaks på land og konsekvenser ved reinjektion. 

Akvaplan-niva. Tromsø. Unpublished Report. 

Albert TF (1981). Some thoughts regarding the possible effects of oil 

contamination on the bowhead whale, Balaena mysticetus. In: Albert TF (ed) 

Tissue structural studies and other investigations on the biology of 

endangered Whales in the Beaufort Sea. Final Report for the period April 1, 

1980 through June 30, 1981, Vol. 2. Prepared for U.S. Department of the 

Interior, Bureau of Land Management, Alaska OCS Office, p. 945-953. 

Alonso-Alvarez C, Munilla I, Lopez-Alonso M, Velando A (2007). Sublethal 

toxicity of the Prestige oil spill on yellow-legged gulls. Environment 

International 33: 773-781. 

Alunno-Bruscia M, Sainte-Marie B (1998). Abdomen allometry, ovary 

development, and growth of female snow crab, Chionoecetes opilio 

(Brachyura, Majidae), in the northwestern Gulf of St. Lawrence. Canadian 

Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 459-477. 

AMAP (2004). AMAP Assessment 2002: Persistent organic pollutants in the 

Arctic. Arctic Monitoring and Assessment Programme (AMAP) Oslo, 

Norway. 310 pp. 

AMAP (2011). Snow, Water, Ice and Permafrost in the Arctic (SWIPA) - 

Executive Summary. AMAP Secretaria. Oslo, Norway. Assessment 

summary 17 pp. 

Ambrose W, Renaud P (1995). Benthic response to water column 

productivity patterns: Evidence for benthic-pelagic coupling in the 

Northeast water polynea. Journal of Geophysical Research 100: 4411-4421. 

Amstrup SC, Marcot BG, Douglas DC (2007). Forecasting the rangewide 

status of polar bears at selected times in the 21st century. USGS Alaska 

Science Center. Anchorage. Administrative Report. 

Amstrup SC, Marcot BG, Douglas DC (2008). A Bayesian Network Modeling 

Approach to Forecasting the 21st century worldwide status of polar bears. 

In: DeWeaver ET, Bitz CM, Tremblay LB (eds) Arctic sea ice decline: 

observations, projections, mechanisms, and implications. Geophysical 

Monograph 180, American Geophysical Union, Washington, DC, p. 213-268.

Andersen JB, Böcher J, Guttmann B, Johnsen I, Kampp K, Skov H, Wegeberg 

S (2005). Baseline Ecological Survey - Thule Air Base. Zoological and 

Botanical Inventory of the Thule Air Base and north Star Bay. DHI Water & 

Environment. 181 pp. 

Andersen JM, Y. F. Wiersma, G. Stenson, M. O. Hammill, and A. Rosing- 

Asvid. (2009). Movement patterns of hooded seals (Cystophora cristata) in the 

Northwest Atlantic ocean during the post-moult and pre-breed seasons. 

Journal of Northwater Atlantic Fish Science 42: 1-11. 

Andersen LW, Born EW (2000). Indications of two genetically different 

subpopulations of Atlantic walruses (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in west 

and northwest Greenland. Canadian Journal of Zoology 78: 1999-2009. 

Andersen LW, Born EW, Dietz R, Haug T, Oien N, Bendixen C (2003). 

Genetic population structure of minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata from 

Greenland, the North East Atlantic and the North Sea probably reflects 

different ecological regions. Marine Ecology Progress Series 247: 263-280. 

Andersen LW, Born EW, Doidge DW, Gjertz I, Wiig Ø, Waples RS (2009a). 

Genetic signals of historic and recent migration between sub-populations of 

Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) west and east of Greenland. 

Endangered Species Research Doi:10.3354/esr00242: 1-15. 

Andersen LW, Born EW, Gjertz I, Wiig O, Holm LE, Bendixen C (1998). 

Population structure and gene flow of the Atlantic walrus (Odobenus 

rosmarus rosmarus) in the eastern Atlantic Arctic based on mitochondrial 

DNA and microsatellite variation. Molecular Ecology 7: 1323-1336. 

Andersen LW, Born EW, Stewart REA, Dietz R, Doidge DW, Lanthier C 

(2009b). A genetic comparison of West Greenland and Baffin Island 

(Canada) walruses: management implications. NAMMCO Scientific 

Committee Working Group on Walrus Stock Status of Atlantic walrus in 

Greenland and adjacent seas. Copenhagen, Denmark. 23-26 November 2009. 

NAMMCO Working Paper SC/17/WWG/06. 

Andersen OGN (1985). Forsøgsfiskeri efter tobis i Vestgrønland 1978. 

Biologiske resultater. Grønlands Fiskeri- og Miljøundersøgelser. 

Copenhagen. Fiskeri- og Miljøundersøgelser i Grønland serie III, 54+174 pp. 

Andriguetto-Filho JM, Ostrensky A, Pie MR, Silva UA, Boeger WA (2005). 

Evaluating the impact of seismic prospecting on artisanal shrimp fisheries. 

Continental Shelf Research 25: 1720-1727. 

Anker-Nilssen T (1987). Metoder til konsekvensanalyser olje/sjøfugl. Norsk 

Institutt for Naturforskning. Trondheim. Vildtrapport No. 44, 114 pp. 

Anon (1978). Bundinvertebrater på Store og Lille Hellefiskebanke og i 

Holsteinsborgdybet. Marine Identification Agency Aps. Skodsborg, 

Denmark. Rapport til Ministeriet for Grønland, 102 pp. 

Anon (2003a). Cumulative Environmental Effects of Oil and Gas Activities 

on Alaska’s North Slope. National Research Council. The National 

Academes Press, Washington, D.C. 

231

232 

Anon (2003b). Utredning av konsekvens av helårlig petroleumsvirksomhet i 

området Lofoten-Barentshavet. Olje- og Energiministeriet. Oslo. Sammendragsrapport. 

Anon (2004a). The 2004 Licence Area 1 (Lady Franklin Basin). A summary of 

the environment and a preliminary assessment of environmental impacts 

from exploration and development of hydrocarbon resources. National 

Environmental Research Institute. Roskilde. Unpublished Report, 28 pp. 

Anon (2004b). The 2004 Licence Area 2 (Kangaamiut Basin). A summary of 

the environment and a preliminary assessment of environmental impacts 

from exploration and development of hydrocarbon resources. National 


Anon (2004c). The 2004 Licence Area 4 (Paamiut Basin). A summary of the 

environment and a preliminary assessment of environmental impacts from 

exploration and development of hydrocarbon resources. National 


Anon (2005). Marine mammal populations and ocean noise. Determining 

when noise causes biologically significant effects. National Research 

Council. The National Academes Press, Washington, D.C. 

Anon (2006a). Quotas for the catch of walruses and polar bears for the years 

2007-2009. Press release 13 December 2006 (J.no. 66.22/04). Greenland 

Home Rule Government. Department of Fishery, Hunting and Agriculture, 

Nuuk. 

Anon (2006b). Quotas for the catch of walruses during 1 August-1 December 

2006. Press release 20 September 2006 (J.no. 66.22/04). Greenland Home 

Rule Government. Department of Fishery, Hunting and Agriculture, Nuuk. 

Anon (2009). Hjemmestyrets bekendtgørelse nr. 8 af 2. marts 2009 om 

beskyttelse og fangst af fugle. Executive order by the Government of 

Greenland. 

Anon (2010a). Hvalroskvoter 2010 (Walrus quotas 2010). Government of 

Greenland. 

http://dk.nanoq.gl/Emner/Landsstyre/Departementer/Departement_for_fiske 

ri/Nyhedsforside/Nyheder_fra_dep_fiskeri/2010/07/hvalroskvoter.aspx. 

Anon (2010b). Hvalroskvoter 2011 (Walrus quotas 2011). Tusagassiorfinnut 

nalunaarut/Pressemeddelelse (Press release), 30 December 2010. 

Government of Greenland. Department of Fishery, Hunting and 

Agriculture, Nuuk. 

Anon (2010c). Selvstyrets bekendtgørelse nr. 11 af 16. juli 2010 om 

beskyttelse og fangst af store hvaler. Executive order by the Government of 

Greenland. 

Anon (2011a). Miljøteknologi. Delutredning til sektorutredning Petroleum 

og energi. Helheltlig forvaltniongsplan for Nordsjøen. Kartleggning av 

tignengelig miljøteknologi. Oljedirektoratet. http://www.npd.no.

Anon (2011b). Selvstyrets bekendtgørelse nr. 7 af 29. marts 2011 om 

beskyttelse og fangst af hvid- og narhvaler. Executive order by the 

Government of Greenland. 

APA (2003). Greenland offshore (West Disko) oil development feasibility 

assessment. Project no. 10166. APA Petroleum Engeneering Inc. 

Unpublished Report. 

APNN (2011a). Kvoter for fangst af hvid- og narhval. Press release from the 

Government of Greenland. 

http://dk.nanoq.gl/Emner/Landsstyre/Departementer/Departement_for_fiske 

ri/Nyhedsforside/Nyheder_fra_dep_fiskeri/2011/03/hvid_narhval.aspx. 

APNN (2011b). Regionale kvoter for fangst af store hvaler 2011. Press release 

from the Government of Greenland. 

http://dk.nanoq.gl/Emner/Landsstyre/Departementer/Departement_for_f 

iskeri/Nyhedsforside/Nyheder_fra_dep_fiskeri/2011/03/regional_fangst_s 

tore_hvaler.aspx. 

Arendt KE, Nielsen TG, Rysgaard S, Tönnesson K (2010). Differences in 

plankton community structure along the Godthabsfjord, from the Greenland 

Ice Sheet to offshore waters. Marine Ecology Progress Series 401: 49-62. 

Armstrong DA, Dinnel PA, Orensanz JM, Armstrong JL, McDonald TL, 

Cusimano RF, Nemeth RS, Landholt ML, Skalski JR, Lee RF, Huggett RJ 

(1995). Status of selected bottomfish and crustaceans species in Prince 

William Sound following the Exxon Valdez oil spill. In: Wells PG, Buttler JN, 

Hughes JS (eds) The Exxon Valdez oil spill: fate and effects in Alaskan 

waters. American Society for Testing and Materials STP1219, Philadelphia, 

p. 485-547. 

Armsworthy SL, Cranford PJ, Lee K (2005). Offshore oil and gas 

environmental effects monitoring. Approaches and technologies. Batelle 

Press, Columbus, Ohio. 

Arnason R (2007). Climate change and fisheries, assessing the economic 

impact in Iceland and Greenland. National Resource Modelling 20: 163–197. 

Au WWL, Carder DA, Penner RH, Scronce BL (1985). Demonstraton of 

adaptation in beluga whale echolocation signals. Journal of the Acoustical 

Society of America 77: 726-730. 

Bach L, Fischer A, Strand J (2010). Local anthropogenic contamination affects 

the fecundity and reproductive success of an Arctic amphipod. Marine 

Ecology Progress Series 419: 121-128. 

Bach L, Forbes VE, Dahllöf I (2009). The amphipod Orchomenella pinguis - 

A potential bioindicator for contamination in the Arctic. Marine Pollution 

Bulletin 58: 1664-1670. 

Baird RW (2000). The killer whale, foraging specializations and group 

hunting In: Mann J, Connor RC, Tyack PL, Whitehead H (eds) Cetacean 

societies, field studies of dolphins and whales. University of Chicago Press, 

Chicago, p. 127-154. 

233

234 

Barrett RT, Chapdelaine G, nker-Nilssen T, Mosbech A, Montevecchi WA, 

Reid JB, Veit RR (2006). Seabird numbers and prey consumption in the 

North Atlantic. ICES Journal of Marine Science 63: 1145-1158. 

Batty P, Josefson AB, Nielsen JD, Frandsen E (2010). Benthic fauna diversity 

along the coast of Southwest Greenland (60-66°N) - Cruise report. Greenland 

Institute of Natural Resources & National Environmental Research Institute, 

University of Aarhus. Nuuk. Unpublished Report, 9 pp. 

Bechmann RK, Westerlund S, Baussant T, Taban C, Pampanin DM, Smit M, 

Lowe D (2006). Impacts of drilling mud discharges on water column 

organism and filter feeding bivalves. IRIS report 2006/038. 

Becker S, Walter B, Bischof K (2009). Freezing tolerance and photosynthetic 

performance of polar seaweeds at low temperatures. Botanica Marina 52: 

609-616. 

Belikov RA, Bel’kovich VM (2006). High-pitched tonal signals of beluga 

whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in a summer assemblage off Solovetskii Island 

in the White Sea. Acoustical physics 52: 125-131. 

Belikov RA, Bel’kovich VM (2007). Whistles of beluga whales in the 

reproductive gathering off Solovetskii Island in the White Sea. Acoustical 

physics 53: 528-534. 

Berge JA, Brevik EM, Bjorge A, Folsvik N, Gabrielsen GW, Wolkers H (2004). 

Organotins in marine mammals and seabirds from Norwegian territory. 

Journal of Environmental Monitoring 6: 108-112. 

Bergstrøm B, Vilhjalmarsson H (2007). Cruise report and preliminary results 

of the acoustic/pelagic trawl survey off West Greenland for capelin and 

polar cod 2005. Pinngortitaleriffik, Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. 

Nuuk. Technical Report No. 66, 71 pp. 

Bergstrøm B, Wilhjámsson H (2006). Cruise report and preliminary results of 

the Acoustic / pelagic trawl survey off West Greenland for capelin and cod 

2006. Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. Unpublished Report, 

60 pp. 

Bergstrom BI (1991). Yearly immigration of Pandalus borealis (Kroyer) into 

periodically isolated fjord populations. Sarsia 76: 133-140. 

Bergstrom BI (2000). The biology of Pandalus. Advances in Marine Biology 

38: 55-245. 

Bergstrom E (2010). Udtalelse om mødet med NAPP og turistaktørerne i 

Nuuk. Press release from the municipality of Sermersooq. August 13. 2010. 

Bertness MD, Leonard GH, Levine JM, Schmidt PR, Ingraham AO (1999). 

Treating the relative contribution of positive and negative interactions in 

rocky intertidal communties. Ecology 80: 2711-2726. 

Best PB (1979). Social organization in sperm whales, Physeter macrocephalus. 

In: Winn HE, Olla BL (eds) Behaviour of marine animals, Vol 3. Plenum 

Press, New York, p. 227-289.

Blackwell SB, Lawson JW, Williams MT (2004). Tolerance by ringed seals 

(Phoca hispida) to impact pipe-driving and construction sounds at an oil 

production island. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 115: 2346- 

2357. 

Blicher ME, Rasmussen LM, Sejr MK, Merkel F, Rysgaard S (2011). 

Abundance and energy requirements of eiders (Somateria spp.) suggest high 

predation pressure on macrobenthic fauna in a key wintering habitat in SW 

Greenland. Polar Biology 34: 1105-1116. 

Blicher ME, Rysgaard S, Sejr MK (2010). Seasonal growth variation of 

Chlamys islandica (Bivalvia) in sub-Arctic Greenland is linked to food 

availability and temperature. Marine Ecology Progress Series 407: 71-86. 

Blicher ME, Sejr MK, Rysgaard S (2009). High carbon demand of dominant 

macrozoobenthic species indicates their central role in ecosystem carbon 

flow in a sub-Arctic fjord. Marine Ecology Progress Series 383: 127-140. 

Bloch D, Lastein L (1993). Morphometric segregation of long-finned pilot 

whales in eastern and western North Atlantic. Ophelia 38: 55-68. 

Boertmann D (2003). Distribution and conservation of the Harlequin Duck, 

Histrionicus histrionicus, in Greenland. Canadian Field-Naturalist 117: 249- 

256. 

Boertmann D (2007). Grønlands Rødliste 2007. Grønlands Hjemmestyre & 

Danmarks Miljøundersøgelser, Nuuk. 

Boertmann D (2008a). Harlequin ducks in Greenland. Waterbirds 31: 4-7. 

Boertmann D (2008b). The lesser black-backed gull, Larus fuscus, in 

Greenland. Arctic 61: 129-133. 

Boertmann D (in press). Seabirds in the central north Atlantic, September 

2006, further evidence for an oceanic seabird aggregation area. Marine 

Ornithology. 

Boertmann D, Lyngs P, Merkel FR, Mosbech A (2004). The significance of 

SW Greenland as winter quarters for seabirds. Bird Conservation 

International 14: 87-112. 

Boertmann D, Mosbech A (1997). Breeding distribution and abundance of 

the great cormorant Phalacrocorax carbo carbo in Greenland. Polar Research 

16: 93-100. 

Boertmann D, Mosbech A (2001). Important summer concentrations of 

seaducks in West Greenland. An input to oil spill sensitivity mapping. 

National Environmental Research Institute (NERI). Copenhagen. NERI 

Technical Report No. 345, 48 pp. 

Boertmann D, Mosbech A (2002). Molting Harlequin ducks in Greenland. 

Waterbirds 25: 326-332. 

235

236 

Boertmann D, Mosbech A (eds) (2011). Eastern Baffin Bay. A strategic 

environmental impact assessment of hydrocarbon activities. DCE - Danish 

Centre for Environment and Energy, Aarhus University, Roskilde. DCE 

Scientific Report No. 9, 270 pp. 

Boertmann D, Mosbech A, Falk K, Kampp K (1996). Seabird colonies in 

western Greenland. National Environmental Research Institute (NERI). 

Copenhagen, Denmark. NERI Technical Report No. 170, 98 pp. 

Boertmann D, Mosbech A, Johansen P (1998). A review of biological 

resources in West Greenland sensitive to oil spills during winter. National 

Environmental Research Institute (NERI). Copenhagen. NERI Technical 

Report No. 246, 74 pp. 

Boertmann D, Mosbech A, Merkel FR (2006). The importance of Southwest 

Greenland for wintering seabirds. British Birds 99: 282-298. 

Boertmann D, Mosbech A, Schiedek D, Johansen K (2009). The eastern Baffin 

Bay. A preliminary strategic environmental impact assessment of 

hydrocarbon activities in the KANUMAS West area. National 

Environmental Research Institute, Aarhus University, Denmark. Roskilde. 

NERI Technical Report No. 720, 238 pp. 

Boertmann D, Tougaard J, Johansen K, Mosbech A (2010). Guidelines to 

environmental impact assessment of seismic activities in Greenland waters. 

2nd edition. National Environmental Research Institute, Aarhus University. 

Roskilde. NERI Technical Report No. 785. 

Boje J (2002). Intermingling and seasonal migrations of Greenland halibut 

(Reinhardtius hippoglossoides) populations determined from tagging studies. 

Fishery Bulletin 100: 414-422. 

Booth JA (1984). The epontic algal community of the edge zone and its 

significance to the Davis Strait ecosystem. Arctic: 234-243. 

Born E (2005). An assessment of the effects of hunting and climate on 

walruses in Greenland. Greenland Institute of Natural Resources and Oslo 

University, Nuuk, Greenland. 

Born E, Dietz R, Heide-Jørgensen MP (1982). Catch and distribution of 

walrus (Odobenus rosmarus) in West Greenland International Council for 

Exploration of the Sea (ICES). Copenhagen. ICES Report C.M. 1982/N:10, 27 

pp. 

Born E, Gjertz I, Reeves RR (1995). Population assessment of Atlantic walrus. 

Norsk Polarinstituts Meddelser 138: p. 1-100. 

Born E, Rysgaard S, Ehlmé G, Sejr M, Acquarone M, Levermann N (2003). 

Underwater observations of foraging free-living Atlantic walruses (Odobenus 

rosmarus) and estimates of their food consumption. Polar Biology 26: 348- 

357. 

Born EW (2001). Reproduction in female Atlantic walruses (Odobenus 

rosmarus rosmarus) from Northwest Greenland. Journal of Zoology 255: 165- 

174.

Born EW (2003). Reproduction in male Atlantic walruses (Odobenus 

rosmarus rosmarus) from the North Water (N Baffin Bay). Marine Mammal 

Science 19: 819-831. 

Born EW, Acquarone M, Knutsen LØ, Toudal E (2005). Homing behaviour in 

an Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus). Aquatic Mammals 31: 23- 

33. 

Born EW, Andersen LW, Gjertz I, Wiig O (2001). A review of the genetic 

relationships of Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) east and west 

of Greenland. Polar Biology 24: 713-718. 

Born EW, Heide-Jørgensen MP, Davis RA (1994). The Atlantic walrus 

(Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in West Greenland. Meddelelser om Grønland, 

Bioscience 40: 1-33. 

Born EW, Kingsley MCS, Riget FF, Dietz R, Møller P, Haug T, Muir DCG, 

Outridge P, Øien N (2007). A multi-elemental approach to identification of 

subpopulations of North Atlantic minke whales Balaenoptera acutorostrata. 

Wildlife Biology 13: 84-97. 

Born EW, Knutsen LØ (1990). Satellite tracking and behavioural 

observations of Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in NE 

Greenland in 1989. Greenland Home Rule, Dept. of Environment and 

Nature. Nuuk. Technical Report No. 20, 68 pp. 

Borum J, Pedersen MF, Krause-Jensen D, Christensen PB, Nielsen K (2002). 

Biomass, photosynthesis and growth of Laminaria saccharina in a high-arctic 

fjord, NE Greenland. Marine Biology 141: 11-19. 

Bourne WRP (1979). Birds and gas flares. Marine Pollution Bulletin 10: 124- 

125. 

Bowen WD, Myers RA, Hay K (1987). Abundance estimation of a dispersed, 

dynamic population - hooded seals (Cystophora cristata) in the Northwest 

Atlantic. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 44: 282-295. 

Bowering WR (1984). Migration of Greenland Halibut, Reinhardtius 

hippoglosoides, in the Northwest Atlantic from tagging in the labradornewfoundland 

region. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science 5: 85- 

91. 

Bowering WR, Brodie WB (1995). Greenland halibut, Reinhardtius 

hippoglosoides. A review of the dynamics of its dribution and fisheries off 

eastern Canada and Greenland. In: G. HA (ed) Deep water fisheries of the 

North Atlantic Slope, Vol 296. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Netherlands, p. 

113-160. 

Bowering WR, Chumakov AK (1989). Distribution and relative abundance of 

Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglosoides, Walbaum) in the Canadian 

Northwest Atlantic from Davis Strait to the Northern-Grand-Bank. Fisheries 

Research 7: 301-327. 

237

238 

Bowman TD, Schempf PF, Hodges JI (1997). Bald eagle population in Prince 

William Sound after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Journal of Wildlife 

Management 61: 962-967. 

Box JE, Cappelen J, Decker D, Fettweis X, Mote T, Tedescoand M, van de 

Wal RSW (2010). Greenland [in Arctic Report Card 2010], NOAA, 

http://www.arctic.noaa.gov/reportcard. 

Boye TK, Simon M, Madsen PT (2010). Habitat use of humpback whales in 

Godthaabsfjord, West Greenland, with implications for commercial 

exploitation. Journal of the Marine Biological Association of the United 

Kingdom 90: 1529-1538. 

Boye TK, Simon M, Ugarte F (2011). A note on guidelines for sustainable 

whale watching in Greenland, with special focus on humpback whales. A 

report for the Greenland Tourism and Business council and Kommuneqarfik 

Sermersooq. Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. Unpublished 

Report. 

Braithwaite LF, Aley MG, Slater DL (1983). The effects of oil on the feeding 

mechanism of the Bowhead whale. Report AA851-CTO-55, prepared for the 

Department of the Interior, from Brigham Young University, Provo, UT. 

Breuer E, Shimmield G, Peppe O (2008). Assessment of metal concentrations 

found within a North Sea drill cutting pile. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56: 

1310-1322. 

Breuer EAG, Stevenson AG, Howe JA, Carroll JC, Shimmield GB (2004). 

Drill cutting accumulations in the Northern and Central North Sea: a review 

of environmental interactions and chemical fate. Marine Pollution Bulletin 

48: 12-25. 

Brewer K, Gallagher M, Regos P, Isert P, Hall J (1993). Exploration Prospect: 

Site Specific Monitoring Program. Final Report Prepared by Coastal and 

Offshore Pacific Corporation, Walnut Creek, CA, for ARCO Alaska, Inc., 

Anchorage, AK. Kuvlum #1, 80 pp. 

Bryan TL, Metaxas A (2006). Distribution of deep-water corals along the 

North American continental margins: Relationships with environmental 

factors. Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 53: 1865- 

1879. 

Buch E (2000). A monograph on the physical oceanography of the Greenland 

waters. Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI). Copenhagen. Scientific 

Report No. 00-12, 405 pp. 

Buch E (2002). Present oceanographic conditions in Greenland Waters. 

Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI). Copenhagen. Scientific Report No. 

02-02, 39 pp. 

Buch E, Horsted SA, Hovgård H (1994). Fluctuations in occurence of cod in 

the Greenland waters and thier possible causes. ICES Marine Science 

Symposia 198: 158-174.

Buch E, Nielsen MH, Pedersen SA (2003). On the coupling between climate, 

hydrography and recruitment variability of fishery resources off West 

Greenland. ICES Marine Science Symposia 219: 231-240. 

Buch E, Pedersen SA, Ribergaard MH (2005). Ecosystem variability in West 

Greenland waters. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science 34: 13-28. 

Buckland ST, Anderson DR, Burnham KP, Laake JL, Borchers DL, Thomas L 

(2001). Introduction to Distance Sampling. Estimating abundance of 

biological populations. Oxford University Press, Oxford. 

Buckland ST, Bloch D, Cattanach KL, Gunnlaugsson T, Hoydal K, Lens S, 

Sigurjónsson J (1993). Distribution and abundance of long-finned pilot 

whales in the North Atlantic, estimated from NASS-1987 and NASS-89 data. 

Cambridge. Report of the International Whaling Commision Special Issue 

No. 14, p. 33-50. 

Buckley LJ, Bradley TM, Allen-Guilmette J (2000). Production, quality, and 

low temperature incubation of eggs of Atlantic cod Gadus morhua and 

haddock Melanogrammus aeglefinus in captivity. Journal of the World 

Aquaculture Society 31: 22-29. 

Bulleri F, Bertocci I, Micheli F (2002). Interplay of encrusting coralline algae 

and sea urchins in maintaining alternative habitats. Marine Ecology Progress 

Series 243: 101-109. 

Burger J (1998). Effects of motorboats and personal watercraft on flight 

behavior over a colony of common terns. Condor 100: 528-534. 

Burmeister A (2002). Preliminary notes on the reproductive condition of 

mature female snow crabs (Chionoecetes opilio) from Disko Bay and Sisimiut, 

west Greenland. In: Paul AJ, Dawe EG, Elner R, Jamieson GS, Kruse GH, 

Otto RS, SainteMarie B, Shirley TC, Woodby D (eds) Crabs in Cold Water 

Regions: Biology, Management, and Economics, Vol 19. Lowell Wakefield 

Fisheries Symposia Series, p. 255-267. 

Burmeister A (2010). Assessment and advice of Snow Crab in West 

Greenland 2010. Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. Technical 


Burmeister A, Sainte-Marie B (2010). Pattern and causes of a temperaturedependent 

gradient of size at terminal moult in snow crab (Chionoecetes 

opilio) along West Greenland. Polar Biology 33: 775-788. 

Burns JJ (1981). Bearded seal Erignatus barbatus. In: Ridgway SH, Harrison 

FRS (eds) Handbook of Marine Mammals, Vol 2. Academic Press, San Diego. 

CAFF (2010). Arctic Biodiversity Trends 2010 – Selected indicators of change. 

CAFF International Secretariat. Akureyri, Iceland. 

Camilli R, Reddy CM, Yoerger DR, Van Mooy BAS, Jakuba MV, Kinsey JC, 

McIntyre CP, Sylva SP, Maloney JV (2010). Tracking hydrocarbon plume 

transport and biodegradation at Deepwater Horizon. Science 330: 201-204. 

239

240 

Camus L, Birkely SR, Jones MB, Børseth JF, Grosvik BF, Gulliksen B, Lonne 

OJ, Regoli F, Depledge MH (2003). Biomarker responses and PAH uptake in 

Mya truncata following exposure to oil-contaminated sediment in an Arctic 

fjord (Svalbard). Science of the Total Environment 308: 221-234. 

Camus L, Jones MB, Børseth JF, Grosvik BE, Regoil F, Depledge MH (2002a). 

Total oxyradical scavenging capacity and cell membrane stability of 

haemocytes of the Arctic scallop, Chlamys islandicus, following 

benzo(a)pyrene exposure. Marine Environmental Research 54: 425-430. 

Camus L, Jones MB, Børseth JF, Regoil F, Depledge MH (2002b). Heart rate, 

respiration and sum oxyradical scavenging capacity of the Arctic spider crab 

Hyas araneus, following exposure to polycyclic aromatic compounds via 

sediment injection. Aquatic Toxicology 62: 1-13. 

Camus L, Olsen GH (2008). Embryo aberrations in sea ice amphipod 

Gammarus wilkitzkii exposed to water soluble fraction of oil. Marine 

Environmental Research 66: 221-222. 

Camus L, S. D (2007). Biological impact of oil on the sea ice of the Arctic. 

Exploration & Production, Oil & Gas Review 11: 28-30. 

Castellote M, Clark CW, Lammers MO (2010). Acoustic compensation to 

shipping and airgun noise by Mediterranean fin whales (Balaenoptera 

physalus). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 127: 1726. 

Challenger G, Mauseth G (2011). Seafood safety and oil spills. In: Fingas M 

(ed) Oil spill science and technology. Elsevier, p. 1083-1100. 

Cheung W, Lam V, Sarmiento J, Kearney K, Watson R, Zeller D, Pauly D 

(2010). Large-scale redistribution of maximum fisheries catch potential in the 

global ocean under climate change. Global Change Biology 16: 24–35. 

Christensen FT, Steensboe JS, Mosbech A (1993). Oil spill simulations as a 

contingency planning tool offshore West Greenland. Proceedings of POAC 

93 Vol. 2, p. 693-707. 

Christensen I (1982). Killer whales in Norwegian coastal waters. Cambridge. 

Report of the International Whaling Commission No. 39, p. 633-641. 

Christensen T (1975). Some marine algae from West Greenland. Botanisk 

Tidskrift 70: 143-146. 

Christensen T (1981). Havbundens planter. In: Böcher TW, Nielsen CO, 

Schou A (eds) Danmarks Natur Grønland og Færøerne, Vol 10. Politikens 

Forlag, p. 184-192. 

Christian JR, Mathieu A, Thomson DH, White D, Buchanan RA (2003). 

Effects of seismic enegry on Snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio). LGL Ltd., 

Oceans Ltd. & National Energy Board. Calgary, Canada. Environmental 

Studies Research Funds Report No. 144, 56 pp. 

Christiansen JS, Karamushko LI, Nahrgang J (2010). Sub-lethal levels of 

waterborne petroleum may depress routine metabolism in polar cod 

Boreogadus saida (Lepechin, 1774). Polar Biology 33: 1049-1055.

Clark RC, Finley JS (1977). Effects of oil spills in arctic and subarctic 

environments. In: Malins DC (ed) Effects of petroleum on arctic and 

subarctic marine environments and organisms Vol II Biological effects. 

Academic Press, New York, p. 411-476. 

Clarke A (2003). Costs and consequences of evolutionary temperature 

adaption. Trends in Ecology and Evolution 18: 573-581. 

Coad BW, Reist JD (2004). Annotated list of the arctic marine fishes of 

Canada. Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Winnipeg. Canadian Manuscript 

Report of Fisheries and Aquatic Science No. 2674, 112 pp. 

Comeau M, Conan GY, Maynou F, Robichaud G, Therriault JC, Starr M 

(1998). Growth, spatial distribution, and abundance of benthic stages of the 

snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) in Bonne Bay, Newfoundland, Canada. 

Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 262-279. 

Comiso JC, Parkinson CL, Gersten R, Stock L (2008). Accelerated decline in 

the Arctic Sea ice cover. Geophysical Research Letters 35:6. 

Compton R, Goodwin L, Handy R, Abbott V (2008). A critical examination of 

worldwide guidelines for minimising the disturbance to marine mammals 

during seismic surveys. Marine Policy 32: 255-262. 

Conan GY, Comeau M (1986). Functional maturity and terminal molt of 

male snow crab, Chionoecetes opilio. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and 

Aquatic Sciences 43: 1710-1719. 

COSEWIC (2006). Assessment and update status report on the Atlantic 

walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in Canada. Committee on the status of 

endangered wildlife in Canada, Ottawa, ix, 65 pp. 

http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/status/status_e.cfm. 

Cronin MA, Hills S, Born EW, Patton JC (1994). Mitochondrial-dna variation 

in Atlantic and Pacific walruses. Canadian Journal of Zoology 72: 1035-1043. 

Cross WE, Wilce RT, Fabijan MF (1987). Effects of releases of oil and 

dispersed oil on Arctic nearshore macrobenthos. III. macroalgae. Arctic 40: 

211-219. 

Cummings WC, Thompson PO (1971). Underwater Sounds from the Blue 

Whales, Balaenoptera musculus. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 

4: 1193-1198. 

Dahl TM, Lydersen C, Kovacs KM, Falk-Petersen S, Sargent J, Gjertz I, 

Gulliksen B (2000). Fatty acid composition of the blubber in white whales 

(Delphinapterus leucas). Polar Biology 23: 401-409. 

Dalebout ML, Ruzzante DE, Whitehead H, Øien N (2006). Nuclear and 

mitochondrial markers reveal distinctiveness of a small population of 

bottlenose whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus) in the western North Atlantic. 

Molecular Ecology 15: 3115–3129. 

241

242 

Dalen J, Hovem JM, Karlsen HE, Kvadsheim PH, Løkkeborg S, Mjelde R, 

Pedersen A, Skiftesvik AB (2008). Kunnskabsstatus of forskningsbehov med 

hensyn til skremmeeffekter og skadevirkninger av seismiske lydbølger på 

fisk og sjøpattedyr. Oljedirektoratet, Fisjkeridirektoratet af Statens 

Forureningstilsyn. Bergen, Norway. 

Daly KL, Wallace DWR, Smith WO, Skoog A, Lara R, Gosselin M, Falck E, 

Yager PL (1999). Non-Redfield carbon and nitrogen cycling in the Arctic: 

Effects of ecosystem structure and dynamics. Journal of Geophysical 

Research Oceans 104: 3185-3199. 

Davies JM, D.R. B, Blackman RAA, Addy JM, Appelbee JF, Grogran WC, J.G. 

P, Whitehead A (1984). Environmental Effects of the Use of Oil-based 

Drilling Muds in the North Sea. Marine Pollution Bulletin 15: 363-370. 

Davis RA, Richardson J, Thiele L, Dietz R, Johansen P (1990). State of the 

Arctic Environment. Report of Underwater noise. Finnish Initiative on 

Protection of the Artic Environment. 

Dawe EG, Colbourne EB (2002). Distribution and Demography of Snow crab 

(Chionoecetes opilio) males on the Newfoundland and Labrador shelf. In: Paul 

AJ, Dawe EG, Elner R, Jamieson GS, Kruse GH, Otto RS, Sainte-Marie B, 

Shirley TC, Woodby D (eds) Crabs in cold water regions: biology, 

management and economics, Alaska Sea Grant College Program, Vol AK- 

SG-02-01, p. 577-594. 

Dean TA, Jewett SC (2001). Habitat-specific recovery of shallow subtidal 

communities following the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Ecological Applications 

11: 1456-1471. 

Derenbach JB, Gereck MV (1980). Interference of petroleum hydrocarbons 

with the sex pheromone reaction of Fucus vesiculosus. Journal of 

Experimental Biology and Ecology 44: 61-65. 

DFO (2004). Review of scientific information on impacts of seismic sound on 

fish, invertebrates, marine turtles and marine mammals. Habitat Status 

Report 2004/002. 

Di Iorio L, Clark C (2010). Exposure to seismic survey alters blue whale 

acoustic communication. Biological Letters 6: 51-54. 

Diercks AR, Asper VL, Highsmith RC, Woolsey M, Lohrenz SE, McLetchie 

K, Gossett A, Lowe M, III, Joung D, McKay L (2010). The discovery of deep 

oil plumes at the deepwater Horizon oil spill site (invited). American 

Geophysical Union, Fall Meeting 2010. 

Dietz R, Born EW, Stewart REA, Heide-Jørgensen MP, Stern H, Riget F, 

Toudal L, Lanthier C, Villum Jensen M, Teilmann J (2011). Movements of 

walruses (Odobenus rosmarus) tracked with satellite transmitters between 

Central West Greenland and Southeast Baffin Island 2005-2008. In: Stewart 

REA, Born EW, Kovacs K, Acquarone M (eds) Studies of the Atlantic walrus 

(Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in the North Atlantic Arctic NAMMCO Special 

Publication: submitted.

Dietz R, Heide-Jørgensen MP (1995). Movements and swimming speed of 

narwhals, Monodon monoceros, equipped with satellite transmitters in 

Melville Bay, northwest Greenland. Canadian Journal of Zoology 73: 2106- 

2119. 

Dietz R, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Richard P, Orr J, Laidre K, Schmidt HC (2008). 

Movements of narwhals (Monodon monoceros) from Admiralty Inlet 

monitored by satellite telemetry. Polar Biology 31: 1295-1306. 

Dietz R, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Richard PR, Acquarone M (2001). Summer 

and fall movements of narwhals (Monodon monoceros) from northeastern 

Baffin Island towards northern Davis Strait. Arctic 54: 244-261. 

Dietz R, Riget F, P. J (1996). Lead, cadmium, mercury and selenium in 

Greenland marine animals. The Science of the Total Environment 186: 67-93. 

Dommasnes A (2010). Changing distribution of marine fish. In: CAFF (ed) 

Arctic Biodiversity Trends 2010 – Selected indicators of change. CAFF 

International Secretariat, Akureyri, Iceland. 

Donaldson WE, Adams AE (1989). Ethogram of behavior with emphasis on 

mating for the tanner crab Chionoecetes bairdi Rathbun. Journal of Crustacean 

Biology 9: 37-53. 

Donovan GP (1991). A review of IWC stock boundaries. Cambridge. Report 

of the International Whaling Commission Special Issue No. 13, p 39-68. 

Drinkwater KF (2005). The response of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) to future 

climate change. ICES Journal of Marine Science 62: 1327-1337. 

Drinkwater KF (2006). The regime shift of the 1920s and 1930s in the North 

Atlantic. Progress in Oceanography 68: 134-151. 

Drinkwater KF (2009). Comparison of the response of Atlantic cod (Gadus 

morhua) in the high-latitude regions of the North Atlantic during the warm 

periods of the 1920s–1960s and the 1990s–2000s. Deep Sea Research II 56: 

2087–2096. 

Driskell WB, Ruesink JL, Lees DC, Houghton JP, Lindstrom SC (2001). Longterm 

signal of disturbance: Fucus gardneri after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. 

Ecological Applications 11: 815-827. 

Dunbar MJ (1954). Arctic and subarctic marine ecology: immediate 

problems. Arctic 7: 213-228. 

Dunlap E, Tang CCL (2006). Modelling the mean circulation of Baffin Bay. 

Atmosphere-Ocean 44: 99-109. 

Dunn RA, Hernandez O (2009). Tracking blue whales in the eastern tropical 

Pacific with an ocean-bottom seismometer and hydrophone array. Journal of 

the Acoustical Society of America 126: 1084-1094. 

Dunton KH, Schell DM (1987). Dependence of consumers on macroalgal 

(Laminaria solidungula) carbon in an arctic kelp community: δ 13 C evidence. 

Marine Biology 93: 615-625. 

243

244 

Dünweber M, Swalethorp R, Kjellerup S, Nielsen TG, Arendt KE, Hjorth M, 

Tönnesson K, Møller EF (2010). Succession and fate of the spring diatom 

bloom in Disko Bay, western Greenland. Marine Ecology Progress Series 

419: 11-29. 

Düwel D, Wegeberg S (1990). Kalkinkrusterede rødalger på Disko: 

Artsbestemmelse, systematik og biologi. In: Andersen PF, Düwel L, Hansen 

OS (eds) Feltkursus i Arktisk Biologi, Godhavn 1990. Copenhagen 

University, p. 61-94. 

Edinger E, Baker K, DeVillers R, Wareham V (2007). Coldwater corals off 

Newfoundland and Labrador: Distribution and fisheries impacts. World 

Wildlife Foundation. Toronto, Canada. WWF Report No. 899, 41 pp. 

Egevang C, Boertmann D (2001). The Greenland Ramsar sites. A status 

report. National Environmental Research Institute (NERI). Copenhagen. 

Egevang C, Stenhouse IJ, Phillips RA, Petersen A, Fox JW, Silk JRD (2010). 

Tracking of Arctic terns Sterna paradisaea reveals longest animal migration. 

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of 

America 107: 2078-2081. 

Elner RW, Beninger PG (1995). Multiple reproductive strategies in snow 

crab, Chionoecetes opilio: Physiological pathways and behavioral plasticity. 

Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 193: 93-112. 

Engås A, Løkkeborg S, Ona E, Soldal AV (1996). Effects of seismic shooting 

on local abundance and catch rates of cod (Gadus morhua) and haddock 

(Melanogramma aeglefinus). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic 

Sciences 53: 2238-2249. 

Eskesen IG, Wahlberg M, Simon M, Larsen ON (2011). Comparison of 

echolocation clicks from geographically sympatric killer whales and longfinned 

pilot whales. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 130: 9-12. 

Fabricius O (1780). Fauna Groenlandica - pattedyr og fugle. Det 

Grønlandske selskabs skrifter VI (translated to Danish by O. Helms), 

Copenhagen 1929. 

Fabry VJ, Seibel BA, Feely RA, Orr JC (2008). Impacts of ocean acidification 

on marine fauna and ecosystem processes. ICES Journal of Marine Science 

65: 414-432. 

Faksness L-G, Brandvik PJ (2005). Dissolution of water soluble components 

from oil spills encapsulated in ice. Proceedings 28th Arctic and Marine 

Oilspill Program Technical Seminar (AMOP), p. 59-73. 

Falk K, Benvenuti S, Dall'antonia L, Kampp K, Ribolini A (2000). Time 

allocation and foraging behaviour of chick-rearing Brunnich's Guillemots 

Uria lomvia in high-arctic Greenland549. Ibis 142: 82-92. 

Falk K, Kampp K (1997). A manual for monitoring thick-billed murre 

populations in Greenland. Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. 

Technical Report No. 7, 90 pp.

Falk K, Møller S (1997). Breeding ecology of the fulmar Fulmarus glacialis and 

the kittiwake Rissa tridactyla in High-Arctic northeastern Greenland, 1993. 

Ibis 139: 270-281. 

Falk-Petersen S, Mayzaud P, Kattner G, Sargent J (2009). Lipids and life 

strategy of Arctic Calanus. Marine Biology Research 5: 18-39. 

Falk-Petersen S, Pavlov V, Timofeev S, Sargent JR (2007). Climate variability 

and possible effects on Arctic food chains: The role of Calanus. In: Ørbæk JB, 

Tombre T, Kallenborn R, Hegseth E, Falk-Petersen S, A.H H (eds) Arctic 

Alpine Ecosystems and People in a Changing Environment. Springer Verlag, 

Berlin, p. 147-166. 

Fay FH (1982). Ecology and Biology of the Pacific walrus, Odobenus rosmarus 

divergens Illiger. U.S. Department of the Interior Fish and Wildlife Service. 

North American Fauna No. 74, 279 pp. 

Fay FH (1985). Odobenus rosmarus. American Society of Mammalogists. 

Lawrence, Kansas. Mammalian Species No. 238, p 1-7. 

Fay FH, Ray GC, Kibalćhich AA (1984). Time and location of mating and 

associated behaviour of the Pacific walrus Odobenus rosmarus divergens 

Illiger, . In: Fay FH, Fedoseev GA (eds) Soviet-American Cooperative 

Research on Marine Mammals Vol 1- Pinnipeds NOAA Technical Reports 

NMFS 12, Washington D.C, p. 89-99. 

Foote AD, Osborne RW, Hoelzel AR (2004). Whale-call response to masking 

boat noise. Nature 428: 910. 

Ford JKB (1989). Acoustic behaviour of recident killer whales (Orcinus orca) 

off Vancouver Island, British Columbia. Canadian Journal of Zoology 67: 

727-745. 

Ford JKB, Fisher HD (1978). Underwater acoustic signals of the narwhal 

(Monodon monoceros). Canadian Journal of Zoology 56: 552-560. 

Foyle T, O'Dor RK, Elner R (1989). Energetically defining the thermal limits 

of the snow crab. Journal of Experimental Biology 145: 371-393. 

Fraser GS, Russell J, Zharen WMV (2006). Produced water from offshore oil 

and gas installations on the grand banks, Newfoundland and Labrador: are 

the potential effects to seabirds sufficiently known. Marine Ornithology 34: 

147-156. 

Frederiksen M, Boertmann D, Cuykens AB, Hansen J, Jespersen M, Johansen 

KL, Mosbech A, Nielsen TG, Söderkvist J (2008). Life in the marginal ice 

zone: oceanographic and biological surveys in Disko Bay and south-eastern 

Baffin Bay April-May 2006. National Environmental Research Institute 

(NERI), University of Aarhus. Roskilde, Denmark. NERI Technical Report 

No. 694, 92 pp. 

Frederiksen M, Vorkamp K, Bossi R, Riget FF, Dam M, Svensmark B (2007). 

Method development for simultaneous analysis of HBCD, TBBPA and 

dimethyl-TBBPA in marine biota from Greenland and the Faroe Islands. 

International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry 87: 1095-1109. 

245

246 

Fredriksen S (2003). Food web studies in a Norwegian kelp forest based on 

stable isotope (δ 13 C and δ 15 C) analysis. Marine Ecology Progress Series 260: 

71-81. 

Freiwald A (1995). Sedimentological and biological aspects in the formation 

of branched rhodoliths in northern Norway. Beitrage Paläontologie 20: 7-19. 

Freiwald A, Fosså JH, Grehan A, Koslow T, Roberts JM (2004). Cold-water 

coral reefs. UNEP-WCMC, Cambridge, UK. 

Friis-Rødel E, Kanneworff P (2002). A review of capelin (Mallotus villosus) in 

Greenland waters. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59: 890-896. 

Fullard KJ, Early G, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Bloch D, Rosing-Asvid A, Amos 

W (2000). Population structure of long-finned pilot whales in the North 

Atlantic: a correlation with sea surface temperature? Molecular Ecology 9: 

949-958. 

Gannon DP, Read AJ, Craddock JE, Mead JG (1997). Stomach contents of 

long-finned pilot whales (Globicephala melas) stranded on the US mid- 

Atlantic coas. Marine Mammal Science 13: 405-413. 

Gaston AJ, Gilchrist HG, Hipfner JM (2005). Climate change, ice conditions 

and reproduction in an Arctic nesting marine bird: Brünnich's guillemot 

(Uria lomvia L.). Journal of Animal Ecology 74: 832-841. 

Gaston AJ, Irons D (2010). Seabirds - murres (guillemots). In: CAFF (ed) 

Arctic Biodiversity Trends 2010 – Selected indicators of change. CAFF 

International Secretariat, Akureyri, Iceland, p. 35-37. 

George JC, Bada J, Zeh J, Scott L, Brown SE, O’Hara T, Suydam R (1999). Age 

and growth estimates of bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) via aspartic 

acid racemization. . Canadian Journal of Zoology 77: 571–580. 

Geraci JR, St. Aubin DJ (eds) (1990). Sea Mammals and Oil. Confronting the 

risk. Academic Press, San Diego. 

GESAMP (1993). Impact of oil and related chemicals on the marine 

environment. Joint group of experts on the scientific aspects of marine 

pollution (GESAMP). International Maritime Organization (IMO), London. 

GESAMP Reports and Studies No. 50, 180 pp. 

Gilg O, Boertmann D, Merkel FR, Aebischer A, Sabard B (2009). Status of the 

endangered ivory gull, Pagophila eburnea, in Greenland. Polar Biology 32: 

1275-1286. 

Gilg O, Strøm H, A. A, Gavrilo MV, Volkov AE, Miljeteig C, Sabard B (2010). 

Post-breeding movements of northeast Atlantic ivory gull Pagophila eburnea 

populations. Journal of Avian Biology 41: 1-11. 

Gilliland S, Gilchrist HG, Rockwell R, Robertson GJ, Savard J-P, Merkel FR, 

Mosbech A (2009). Evaluating the sustainability of harvest among Northern 

Common Eiders in Greenland and Canada. Wildlife Biology 15: 24-36.

Gjertz I, Kovacs KM, Lydersen C, Wiig O (2000). Movements and diving of 

bearded seal (Erignathus barbatus) mothers and pups during lactation and 

post-weaning. Polar Biology 23: 559-566. 

Glud R, Gundersen J, Røy H, Jørgensen B (2003). Seasonal dynamics of 

benthic O2 uptake in a semienclosed bay: Importance of diffusion and faunal 

activity. Limnology and Oceanography 48: 1265-1276. 

Glud RN, Berg P, Hume A, Batty P, Blicher ME, Lennert K, Rysgaard S 

(2010). Benthic O2 exchange across hard-bottom substrates quantified by 

eddy correlation in a sub-Arctic fjord. Marine Ecology Progress Series 417: 1- 

12. 

Gordon J, Gillespie D, Potter J, Frantzis A, Simmonds MP, Swift R, 

Thompson D (2003). A Review of the Effects of Seismic Surveys on Marine 

Mammals. Marine Technology Society Journal 37: 16-34. 

Gosselin M, Levasseur M, Wheeler PA, Horner RA, Booth BC (1997). New 

measurements of phytoplankton and ice algal production in the Arctic 

Ocean. Deep-Sea Research Part I-Oceanographic Research Papers 44: 1623- 

1644. 

Gowans S, Whitehead H, Hooker SK (2001). Social organization in northern 

bottlenose whales, Hyperoodon ampullatus: not driven by deep-water 

foraging? Animal Behaviour 62: 369-377. 

Gradinger R, Friedrich C, Spindler M (1999). Abundance, biomass and 

composition of the sea ice biota of the Greenland Sea pack ice. Deep-Sea 

Research Part I-Oceanographic Research Papers 46: 1457-1472. 

Graham B, Reilly WK, Beinecke F, Boesch DF, Garcia TD, Murrey CA, Ulmer 

F (2011). Deep Water. The Gulf oil disaster and the future of offshore 

drilling. Report to the President. National Commission on the BP Deepwater 

Horizon Oil Spill and Offshore Drilling. 

Gray JS (2002). Species richness of marine soft sediments. Marine Ecology 

Progress Series 244: 285-297. 

Gray JS, Clarke KR, Warwick RM, Hobbs G (1990). Detection of initial effects 

of pollution on marine benthos: an example from the Ekofisk and Eldfisk 

oilfields. North Sea 66: 285-299. 

Grebmeier J, McRoy C (1989). Pelagic-benthic coupling on the northern 

Bering and Chukchi seas. III. Benthic food supply and carbon cycling. 

Marine Ecology Progress Series 53: 79-91. 

Greene CRJ, McLennan MW, Norman RG, McDonald TL, Jakubczak RS, 

Richardson WJ (2004). Directional frequency and recording (DIFAR) sensors 

in seafloor recorders to locate calling bowhead whales during their fall 

migration. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 1116: 799-813. 

Grenvald JC, Hjorth M, Nielsen TG (in prep.). Impact of oil pollution and 

climate change on early development of two co-existing arctic copepods. 

247

248 

Griffiths DJ, Øritsland NA, Øritsland T (1987). Marine mammals and 

petroleum activities in Norwegian waters. Fisken og Havet Serie B No. 1, 179 

pp. 

Gundersen AC, Stenberg C, Fossen I, Lyberth B, Boje J, Jorgensen OA (2010). 

Sexual maturity cycle and spawning of Greenland halibut Reinhardtius 

hippoglossoides in the Davis Strait. Journal of Fish Biology 77: 211-226. 

Hall JD, Gallagher M, Brewer K, Regos P, Isert P (1994). 1993 Kuvlum 

exploration area site specific monitoring program. Prepared for ARCO 

Alaska, Inc., Anchorage, AK, by Coastal and Offshore Pacific Corporation, 

Walnut Creek, CA. 

Hamilton LC, Brown B, Rasmussen OR (2003). West Greenland’s cod-to 

shrimp transition: local dimensions of climate change. Arctic 56: 271-282. 

Hammeken NA, Kingsley MCS (2010). The fishery for Northern shrimp 

(Pandalus borealis) off West Greenland, 1970 - 2010. Northwest Atlantic 

Fisheries Organization. Dartmouth, Canada. NAFO Scientific Council 

Research Document No. 10/53, Serial No. N5844. 

Hammill MO, Lydersen C, Ryg M, Smith TG (1991). Lactation in the ringed 

seal (Phoca hispida). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 48: 

2471-2476. 

Hammill MO, Stenson GB (2010). Abundance of Northwest Atlantic harp 

seals (1952-2010). DFO Can. Sci. Advis. Sec. Res. Doc. No. 2009/114. iv, 12. 

Hannam ML, Bamber SD, Moody AJ, Galloway TS, Jones MB (2010). 

Immunotoxicity and oxidative stress in the Arctic scallop Chlamys islandica: 

Effects of acute oil exposure. Ecotoxicology and Environmental Safety 73: 

1440-1448. 

Hannam ML, Bamber SD, Moody JA, Galloway TS, Jones MB (2009). 

Immune function in the Arctic Scallop, Chlamys islandica, following 

dispersed oil exposure. Aquatic Toxicology 92: 187-194. 

Hansen AS, Nielsen TG, Levinsen H, Madsen SD, Thingstad TF, Hansen BW 

(2003). Impact of changing ice cover on pelagic productivity and food web 

structure in Disko Bay, West Greenland: a dynamic model approach. Deep- 

Sea Research Part I-Oceanographic Research Papers 50: 171-187. 

Hansen BU, Elberling B, Humlum O, Nielsen N (2006). Metrological trends 

(1991-2004) at Arctic Station, Central West Greenland (69º15’N) in a 130 

years perspective. Danish Journal of Geography 106: 45-55. 

Hansen BW, Nielsen TG, Levinsen H (1999). Plankton community structure 

and carbon cycling on the western coast of Greenland during the stratified 

summer situation. III. Mesozooplankton. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 16: 233- 

249.

Hansen JLS, Hjorth M, Rasmussen MB, Bruhn A, Christensen PB (2012a). 

Mapping of macroalgae in the coastal zone of Disko West - Box X. In: 

Schiedek D, Dünweber M, Boertmann D (eds) Disko West A strategic 

environmental impact assessment of hydrocarbon activities in the Disko 

West area. DCE - Danish Centre for Environment and Energy, Aarhus 

University, Roskilde. 

Hansen JLS, Sejr MK, Josefson AB, Batty P, Hjort M, Rysgaard S (2012b). 

Benthic invertebrate macrofauna in the Disko West area emphasising the 

area around the Store Hellefiske Bank. In: Schiedek D, Dünweber M, 

Boertmann D (eds) Disko West A strategic environmental impact assessment 

of hydrocarbon activities in the Disko West area. DCE - Danish Centre for 

Environment and Energy, Aarhus University, Roskilde. 

Hansen KQ, Buch E, Gregersen U (2004). Weather, sea and ice conditions 

offshore West Greenland - focusing on new licence areas. Danish 

Meteorological Institute (DMI) and Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum 

(BMP). Copenhagen. Unpublished Report, 41 pp. 

Hansen PM, Hermann F (1953). Fisken og havet ved Grønland. Skrifter fra 

Danmarks Fiskeri- og Havundersøgelser 15: 128 pp. 

Hansen RG (2010). Abundance and distribution of long-finned pilot whales, 

white-beaked dolphins and harbour porpoise in west Greenland. Master 

Thesis, Copenhagen University, Denmark and Greenland Institute of 

Natural Resources. 

Harvey JT, Dalheim ME (1994). Cetaceans in oil. In: Marine Mammals and 

the Exxon Valdez. Academic Press, San Diego, p. 257-264. 

Hassel A, Knutsen T, Dalen J, Skaar K, Løkkeborg S, Misund OA, Østensen 

Ø, Fonn M, Haugland EK (2004). Influence of seismic shooting on the lesser 

sandeel (Ammodytes marinus). ICES Journal of Marine Science 61: 1165- 

1173. 

Hawkins SJ, Gibbs PE, Pope ND, Burt GR, Chesman BS, Bray S, Proud SV, 

Spence SK, Southward AJ, Langston WJ (2002). Recovery of polluted 

ecosystems: the case for long-term studies. Marine Environmental Research 

54: 215-222. 

Hay K (1982). Aerial line-transect estimates of abundance of humpback, fin 

and long-fined pilot whales in the Newfoundland-Labrador area. 

International Whaling Commission Report 32: 475-486. 

Haynes EB, Wigley RL (1969). Biology of Northern shrimp Pandalus borealis 

in the Gulf of Maine. Transactions of the American Fisheries Society 98: 60-. 

Hazen (2010). Deep-sea oil plume enriches indigenous oil-degrading 

bacteria. Science 330: 204-208. 

Head EJH, Harris LR, Yashayaev I (2003). Distributions of Calanus spp. and 

other mesozooplankton in the Labrador Sea in relation to hydrography in 

spring and summer (1995-2000). Progress in Oceanography 59: 1-30. 

249

250 

Heath MF, Evans MI (2000). Important bird areas in Europe. Priority sites for 

conservation. BirdLife International, Cambridge, UK. 

Hedeholm R, Gronkjaer P, Rosing-Asvid A, Rysgaard S (2010). Variation in 

size and growth of West Greenland capelin (Mallotus villosus) along 

latitudinal gradients. ICES Journal of Marine Science 67: 1128-1137. 

Hedeholm RB (2010). The importance of small pelagic fishes to the energy 

flow in marine ecosystems: the Greenlandic capelin. Ph.D. Thesis, Aarhus 

University, Denmark and Greenland Institute of Natural Resources, 

Greenland. 

Heide-Jørgensen M, Laidre K (2006). Greenland's winter whales: The beluga, 

the narwhal and the bowhead whale. Ilinniusiorfik Undervisningsmiddelforlag, 

Nuuk, Greenland. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP (1988). Occurrence and hunting of killer whales in 

Greenland. Rit Fiskideildar 11: 115-135. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP (1994). Distribution, exploitation and population status 

of white whales (Delphinapterus leucas) and Narwhals (Monodon monoceros) in 

West Greenland. Meddelelser om Grønland, Bioscience 39: 135-151. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Borchers DL, Witting L, Laidre KL, Simon MJ, Rosingasvid 

A, Pike G (2008a). Estimates of large whale abundance in West 

Greenland waters from an aerial survey in 2005. Journal of Cetacean 

Research and Management 10: 119-129. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Born EW, Laidre KL, Fossette S, Hansen RG, Dietz R, 

Rasmussen M, Stern H (2011). Abundance and trends in abundance of the 

Atlantic walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in Central West Greenland. In: 

Stewart REA, Born EW, Kovacs K, Acquarone M (eds) Studies of the Atlantic 

walrus (Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus) in the North Atlantic Arctic NAMMCO 

Special Publication: submitted. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Dietz R, Laidre KL, Richard P, Orr J, Schmidt HC 

(2003a). The migratory behaviour of narwhals (Monodon monoceros). 

Canadian Journal of Zoology 81: 1298-1305. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Garde E, Nielsen NH, Andersen ON (2010a). 

Biological data from the hunt of bowhead whales in West Greenland 2009 

and 2010 Cambridge. Report of the International Whaling Commission No. 

SC/62/BRG27. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre K, Borchers D, Samarra F, Stern H (2007a). 

Increasing abundance of bowhead whales in West Greenland. Biology letters 

3: 577-580. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre KL (2007). Autumn space-use patterns of 

humpback whales (Megaptera novaeangliae) in West Greenland. Journal of 

Cetacean Research and Management 9: 121-126. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre KL (2008). Fluctuating abundance of minke 

whales in West Greenland. Cambridge. Report of the International Whaling 

Commission No. SC/60/AWMP5.

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre KL (2010). Studies of bowhead whales in 

relation to the Disko West environmental assessment, 2009-2010. Greenland 

Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. GINR report to NERI for the Disko 

West Environmental Forum. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre KL, Borchers D, Marques TA, Stern H, Simon 

M (2009). The effect of sea-ice loss on beluga whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in 

West Greenland. Polar Research 29: 198-208. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre KL, Burt ML, Borchers DL, Marques TA, 

Hansen RG, Rasmussen M, Fossette S (2010b). Abundance of narwhals 

(Monodon monoceros) on the hunting grounds in Greenland. Journal of 

Mammalogy 91: 1135-1151. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre KL, Hansen RG, Rasmussen M, Burt ML, 

Borchers DL, Dietz R, Teilmann R (2008). Revised abundance estimates of 

humpback whales in West Greenland Cambridge. Report of the 

International Whaling Commission No. SC/60/AWMP7, 35 pp. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre KL, Hansen RG, Simon M, Burt ML, Borchers 

DL, Hansen J, Harding K, Rasmussen M, Dietz R, Teilmann J (in press). Rate 

of increase and current abundance of humpback whales in West Greenland. 

Journal of Cetacean Research and Management. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Laidre KL, Jensen MV, Dueck L, Postma LD (2006). 

Dissolving stock discreteness with satellite tracking: Bowhead whales in 

Baffin Bay. Marine Mammal Science 22: 34-45. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Richard P, Dietz R, Laidre KL, Orr J, Schmidt HC 

(2003b). An estimate of the fraction of belugas (Delphinapterus leucas) in the 

Canadian high Arctic that winter in West Greenland. Polar Biology 26: 318- 

326. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Stern H, Laidre KL (2007b). Dynamics of the sea ice 

edge in Davis Strait. Journal of Marine Systems 67: 170-178. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Teilmann J (1994). Growth, reproduction, age structure 

and feeding habits of white whales (Delphinapterus leucas) in West Greenland 

waters. Meddelelser om Grønland, Bioscience 39: 195-212. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Witting L, Laidre KL, Hansen RG (2010c). Fully 

corrected estimates of minke whale abundance in West Greenland in 2007. 

Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 11: 75-82. 

Heide-Jørgensen MP, Witting L, Laidre KL, Hansen RG, Rasmussen M 

(2008b). Revised estimates of minke whale abundance in West Greenland in 

2007. Cambridge. Report of the International Whaling Commission No. 

SC/61/AWMP4, 19 pp. 

Hirche HJ, Kosobokova K (2007). Distribution of Calanus finmarchicus in the 

northern North Atlantic and Arctic Ocean - Expatriation and potential 

colonization Effects of Climate Variability on Sub-Arctic Marine Ecosystems 

- A GLOBEC Symposium, GLOBEC-ESSAS Symposium on "Effects of 

climate variability on sub-arctic marine ecosystems" Victoria, Canada, p 

2729-2747. 

251

252 

Hirst AG, Rodhouse PG (2000). Impacts of geophysical seismic surveying on 

fishing success. Reviews in Fish Biology and Fisheries 10. 

Hjermann DØ, Melson A, Dingsør GE, Durant JM, Eikeset AM, Røed LP, 

Ottersein G, Storvil G, Stenseth NC (2007). Fish and oil in the Lofoten- 

Barents Sea System: synoptic review of the effects of oil spill on fish 

populations. Marine Ecology Progress Series 339: 283-299. 

Hjort J, Ruud TS (1938). Deep-sea prawn fisheries and thier problems. 

Hvalrådets Skrifter 17: 1-144. 

Hjorth M, Dahllöf I (2008). A harpacticoid copepod Microsetella spp. from 

sub-Arctic coastal waters and its sensitivity towards the polyaromatic 

hydrocarbon pyrene. Polar Biology 31: 1437-1443. 

Hjorth M, Forbes VE, Dahllöf I (2008). Plankton stress responses from PAH 

exposure and nutrient enrichment. Marine Ecology Progress Series 363: 121- 

130. 

Hjorth M, Nielsen TG (2011). Oil exposure in a warmer Arctic: potential 

impacts on key zooplankton species. Marine Biology: 1-9. 

Hjorth M, Vester J, Henriksen P, Forbes V, Dahllöf I (2007). Functional and 

structural responses of marine plankton food web to pyrene contamination. 


Hoekstra PF, O'Hara TM, Pallant SJ, Solomon KR, Muir DCG (2002). 

Bioaccumulation of organochlorine contaminants in bowhead whales 

(Balaena mysticetus) from Barrow, Alaska. Archives of Environmental 

Contamination and Toxicology 42: 497-507. 

Holth TF, Beylich BRA, Skarpheðinsdottir HÜ, Liewenborg B, Grung M, 

Hylland K (2009). Genotoxicity of environmentally relevant concentrations 

of water-soluble oil components in cod (Gadus morhua). Environmental 

Science and Technology 43: 3329-3334. 

Hooker SK, Baird RW (1999). Deep-diving behaviour of the northern 

bottlenose whale, Hyperoodon ampullatus (Cetacea : Ziphiidae). Proceedings 

of the Royal Society of London Series B - Biological Sciences 266: 671-676. 

Hooker SK, Whitehead H (2002). Click characteristics of northern bottlenose 

whales (Hyperoodon ampullatus). Marine Mammal Science 18: 69-80. 

Hooker SK, Whitehead H, Gowans S, Baird RW (2002). Fluctuations in 

distribution and patterns of individual range use of northern bottlenose 

whales. Marine Ecology Progress Series 225: 287-297. 

Hopcroft RR, Clarke C, Nelson RJ, Raskoff KA (2005). Zooplankton 

communities of the Arctic's Canada Basin: the contribution by smaller taxa. 

Polar Biology 28: 198-206. 

Horsted SA (1978). The life cycle of shrimp, Pandalus borealis Krøjer, in 

Greenland waters in relation to potential yield. ICNAF Selected Papers 4: 51- 

60.

Horsted SA (2000). A review of the cod fisheries at Greenland, 1910-1995. 

Journal of Northwater Atlantic Fish Science 28: 1-112. 

Horsted SA, Smidth E (1956). The deep sea prawn (Pandalus borealis) in 

Greenland waters. Meddelelser fra Danmarks Fiskeri- og Havundersøgelser 

1: 1-118. 

Horwood J (1989). Biology and exploitation of the minke whale. CRC Press, 

Florida. 

Huse G (1998). Sex-specifik life history strategies in capelin (Mallotus 

villosus)? Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55: 631-638. 

Huse G, Ellingsen I (2008). Capelin migrations and climate change - a 

modelling analysis. Climatic Change 87: 177-197. 

Hylland K, Lang T, Vethaak AD (2006). Biological effects of contaminants in 

marine pelagic ecosystems. Society of Environmental Toxicology and 

Chemistry (SETAC), Pensacola, FL (USA). 

Hylland K, Tollefsen KE, Ruus A, Jonsson G, Sundt RC, Sanni S, Røe Utvik 

TI, Johnsen S, Nilssen I, Pinturier L, Balk L, Barsiene J, Marigòmez I, Feist 

SW, Børseth JF (2008). Water column monitoring near oil installations in the 

North Sea 2001-2004. Marine Pollution Bulletin 56: 414-429. 

ICES (2006). Report of the Working Group on ICES/NAFO Working Group 

on Harp and Hooded Seals (WGHARP), 12-16 June 2006. ICES 

Headquarters. Copenhagen. ICES Working Group Report CM 2006/ACFM: 

32, 28 pp. 

ICES (2010a). Report of the ICES/NAFO Joint Working Group on 

Deep‐water Ecology (WGDEC), 22–26 March 2010, Copenhagen, Denmark. 

ICES CM 2010/ACOM:26. 160 pp. 

ICES (2010b). Stock Annex: Cod Stocks in the Greenland Area (NAFO Area 1 

and ICES Subdivision XIVB). North Western Working Group (NWWG). 

Copenhagen. ICES NWWG Report 2010, 28 pp. 

ICES/NAFO (1997). Report of the joint ICES/NAFO Working Group on 

harp and hooded seals, August-September 1997. ICES/NAFO. Copenhagen. 

ICES Working Group Report C.M. 1998/Assess:3 (NAFO SCS Coc. 97/17, 

Ser. No. N2943), 35 pp. 

Irons DB, Anker-Nilssen T, Gaston AJ, Byrd GV, Falk K, Gilchrist HG, Hario 

M, Hjernquist M, Krasnov YV, Mosbech A, Olsen B, Petersen A, Reid JB, 

Robertson GJ, Strom H, Wohl KD (2008). Fluctuations in circumpolar seabird 

populations linked to climate oscillations. Global Change Biology 14: 1455- 

1463. 

IUCN (2008). The IUCN Red List of Threatened Species. 

http://www.iucnredlist.org/. 

IUCN (2010). Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2010.4. IUCN, 

http://www.iucnredlist.org. 

253

254 

IUCN (2011). Red List of Threatened Species. Version 2011.1. 

IWC (2010). Chair's Report of the 62th Annual Meeting. Annual report of the 

International Whaling Commission 2010. 

http://iwcoffice.org/meetings/chair2010.htm. 

Jacobsen JA, Asmund G (2000). TBT in marine sediments and blue mussels 

(Mytilus edulis) from central-west Greenland. Science of the Total 

Environment 245: 131-136. 

Jefferson TA, Webber MA, Pitman RL (2008). Marine mammals of the world, 

a comprehensive guide to their identification. Academic Press, London. 

Jensen AM, Sheehan GW, MacLean SA (2008a). Inuit and Marine Mammals. 

In: Perrin WF, Wursig B, Thewissen JGM (eds) Encyclopedia of Marine 

Mammals. Academic Press, p. 628 - 637. 

Jensen JM (1990). Atlantic salmon at Greenland. Fisheries Research 10: 29-52. 

Jensen LK, Carroll J, Pedersen G, Hylland K, Dahle S, Bakke T (2006). A 

multi-generation Calanus finmarchicus culturing system for use in longterm 

oil exposure experiments. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and 

Ecology 333: 71-78. 

Jensen MH, Nielsen TG, Dahllöf I (2008b). Effects of pyrene on grazing and 

reproduction of Calanus finmarchicus and Calanus glacialis from Disko Bay, 

West Greenland. Aquatic Toxicology 87: 99-107. 

Jensen T, Palerud R, Olsgard F, Bakke SM (1999). Spredning og effekter av 

syntetiske borevæsker i miljøet. Norwegian Ministry of Petroleum and 

Industry. Rapport 99-3507, 49 pp. 

Jernelöv A (2010). The threats from oil spills: now, then, and in the future. 

Ambio 39: 353-366. 

Johansen Ø (1999). Exploratory drillings at the Fylla Field south west of 

Greenland: Near Field spreading of oil and gas from potential deep water 

blowouts. SINTEF, Trondheim. 

Johansen Ø, Rye H, Melbye AG, Jensen HV, Serigstad B, Knutsen T (2001). 

Deep Spill JIP – Experimental discharges of gas and oil at Helland Hansen, 

June 2000. SINTIF Technical Report. 

Johansen Ø, Skognes K, Aspholm OØ, Østby C, Moe KA, Fossum P (2003). 

Utredning af helårs oljevirksomhet i området Lofoten-Barentshavet, 

Uhellsutslipp av olje – konsekvenser i vannsøylen (ULB 7-c). SINTEF 

rapport, Trondheim. 

Johansen P, Aastrup P, Boertmann D, Glahder C, Johansen K, Nymand J, 

Rasmussen LM, Tamstorf MP (2008). Aluminiumsmelter og vandkraft i det 

centrale Vestgrønland. Datagrundlag for natur og ressourceudnyttelse i 

forbindelse med udarbejdelse af en Strategisk Miljøvurdering (SMV). 

National Environmental Research Institute, Aahus University and 

Greenland Institute og Natural Resources. Roskilde, Denmark. Faglig 

rapport fra DMU nr. 664, 116 pp.

Jonas RF (1974). Prospect for the establishment of stocks of Atlantic and 

Pacific salmon in Southwest Greenland: a survey emphasis upon an 

evaluation of potential for significant natural production. Grønlands 

Fiskeriundersøgelser. Charlottelund, Denmark. Unpublished Report. 

Jones PH (1980). The effect on birds of a North Sea gas flare. British Birds 73: 

547-555. 

Jonsson H, Sundt RC, Aas E, Sanni S (2010). The Arctic is no longer put on 

ice: Evaluation of Polar cod (Boreogadus saida) as a monitoring species of oil 

pollution in cold waters. Marine Pollution Bulletin 60: 390-395. 

Jorgensen OA (1997). Pelagic occurence of greenland halibut, Reinhardtius 

hippoglosoides, at West Greenland waters. Journal of Northwater Atlantic 

Fishery Science 21: 39-50. 

Jørgensen OA (1997). Movement patterns of Greenland halibut, Reinhardtius 

hippoglossoides, at West Greenland, as inferred from trawl survey 

distribution and size data. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science 21: 

23-37. 

Jørgensen OA (2010). Assessment of the greenland halibut stock component 

in NAFO Subarea 0 + division 1A offshore + division 1B-1F. Northwest 

Atlantic Fisheries Organization Dartmouth, Canada. NAFO Scientific 

Council Research Document No. 10/24. 

Joye S, MacDonald (2010). Offshore oceanic impacts from the BP oil spill. 

Nature Geoscience 3: 446. 

Juul-Pedersen T, Gissel Nielsen T, Michel C, Friis Møller E, Tiselius P, Thor 

P, Olesen M, Selander E, Gooding S (2006). Sedimentation following the 

spring bloom in Disko Bay, West Greenland, with special emphasis on the 

role of copepods. Marine Ecology-Progress Series 314: 239-255. 

Juul-Pedersen T, Rysgaard S, Batty P, Mortensen J, Retzel A, Nygaard R, 

Burmeister A, Mikkelsen DM, Sejr MK, Blicher ME, Krause-Jensen D, 

Christensen PB, Labansen AL, Rasmussen LM, Simon M, Boye TK, Madsen 

PT, Ugarte F (2008). Nuuk Basic: The MarineBasic Programme. In: Jensen 

LM, Rasch M (eds) Nuuk Ecological Research Operations, 2nd Annual 

Report, 2008. National Environmental Research Institute (NERI), Aarhus 

University, Roskilde, Denmark, p. 39-51. 

Juul-Pedersen T, Rysgaard S, Batty P, Mortensen J, Retzel A, Nygaard R, 

Burmeister A, Søgaard DH, Martinsen W, Sejr MK, Blicher ME, Krause- 

Jensen D, Christensen PB, Marbà N, Olesen B, Labansen AL, Rasmussen LM, 

Witting L, Simon M, Ugarte F (2009). Nuuk Basic: The MarineBasic 

Programme. In: Jensen LM, Rasch M (eds) Nuuk Ecological Research 

Operations, 3rd Annual Report, 2009. National Environmental Research 

Institute (NERI), Aarhus University, Roskilde, Denmark, p. 42-53. 

Kahru M, Brotas AS, Manzano-Sarabiaz M, Mitchell BG (2011). Are 

phytoplankton blooms occurring earlier in the Arctic? Global Change 

Biology 17: 1733–1739. 

255

256 

Kaiser MJ, Pulsipher AG (2005). Rigs-to-Reef programs in the Gulf of 

Mexico. Ocean Development & International Law 36: 119-134. 

Kålås JA, Gjershaug JO, Husby M, Lifjeld JT, Lislevand T, Strann K-B, Strøm 

H (2010). Fugler. In: Kålås JA, Viken Å, Henriksen S, Skjelseth S (eds) The 

2010 Norwegian Red List for species. Artsdatabanken, Trondheim, p. 419- 

429. 

Kampp K, Wille F (1990). The white-tailed eagle population in Greenland. 

Dansk Ornithologisk Forenings Tidsskrift 84: 37-44. 

Kanneworff P (2003). Occurence of Pandalus montagui in trawl survey 

samples from NAFO Subareas 0+1. Northwest Atlantic Fisheries 

Organization Dartmouth, Canada. NAFO Scientific Council Research 

Document No. 03/70, Serial No. N4909. 

Kapel FO (1979). Exploitation of large whales in West Greenland in the 

twentieth century. International Whaling Commision. Unpublished Report 

No. 29. 

Kapel FO (1985). On the occurrence of sei whales (Balaenoptera borealis) in 

West Greenland Waters. . Cambridge. Report of the International Whaling 

Commission No. 35, p. 349-352. 

Kapel FO (1991). Grønlandssælernes fødevalg ved Vestgrønland. Grønlands 

Fiskeriundersøgelser. Copenhagen, Denmark. Unpublished Report, 63 pp. 

Kapel FO (1998). The Davis Strait hooded seal breeding patch. Greenland 

Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. Unpublished Report, 10 pp. 

Karlsen HG, Bille-Hansen J, Hansen KQ, Andersen HS, Skourup H (2001). 

Distribution and variability of icebergs in the eastern Davis Strait 63° N to 

68° N. Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP) and Danish Meterological 

Institute (DMI). Greenland Survey Report (ASIAQ) No. 2001 - 1, 36 pp. 

Karnovsky NJ, Kwasniewski S, Weslawski JM, Walkusz W, Beszczynska- 

Möller A (2003). Foraging behavior of little auks in a heterogeneous 

environment. Marine Ecology Progress Series 253: 289-303. 

Karsten U (2007). Salinity tolerance of Arctic kelps from Spitsbergen. 

Phycological Research 55: 257-262. 

Kattner G, Hagen W, Lee RF, Campbell R, Deibel D, Falk-Petersen S, Graeve 

M, Hansen BW, Hirche HJ, Jonasdottir SH, Madsen ML, Mayzaud P, Müller- 

Navarra D, Nichols PD, Paffenhofer GA, Pond D, Saito H, Stubing D, Virtue 

P (2007). Perspectives on marine zooplankton lipids. Canadian Journal of 

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 64: 1628-1639. 

Kerr RA (2010). A lot of oil on the loose. Not so much to be found. Science 

329: 734-735. 

Ketten DR (1995). Estimates of blast injury and acoustic trauma zones for 

marine mammals from underwater explosions. In: Kastelein RA, Thomas JA, 

Nachtigall PE (eds) Sensory systems of aquatic mammals. De Spil 

Publishers, Woerden, p. 391-407.

Ketten DR, Lien J, Todd S (1993). Blast injury in humpback whale ears: 

evidence and implications. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 94: 

1849-1850. 

Kideys AE (2002). Fall and rise of the Black Sea ecosystem. Science 297: 1482- 

1483. 

Kitaysky AS, Golubova EG (2000). Climate change causes contrasting trends 

in reproductive performance of planktivorous and piscivorous alcids. 

Journal of Animal Ecology 69: 248-262. 

Kjellerup S, Dünweber M, Swalethorp R, Hansen BW, Nielsen TG, Møller EF 

(2011). Importance of timing vertical migration and reproduction to the 

Arctic spring bloom in a future warmer climate, with emphasis on the 

potential competition between co-existing Calanus finmarchicus and C. 

glacialis. Submitted to Marine Ecology-Progress Series. 

Kjørsvik E (1994). Egg quality in wild and broodstock cod Gadus morhua. 

Journal of the World Aquaculture Society 25: 22-29. 

Koeller P, Fuentes-Yaco C, Platt T, Sathyendranath S, Richards A, Ouellet P, 

Orr D, Skuladottir U, Wieland K, Savard L, Aschan M (2009). Basin-Scale 

Coherence in Phenology of Shrimps and Phytoplankton in the North 

Atlantic Ocean. Science 324: 791-793. 

Krause-Jensen D, Kühl M, Christensen PB, Borum J (2007). Benthic primary 

production in Young Sound, Northeast Greenland. Meddelelser om 

Grønland, Bioscience 58: 160-173. 

Krause-Jensen D, Marbà N, Olesen B, Christensen PB, Sejr MK, Rodrigues J, 

Rysgaard S (2011). Benthic marine vegetation in Greenland - response to 

climate forcing. Arctic Frontiers. The Arctic in the earth System perspective: 

the role of tipping points, Tromsø. 

Kroeker KJ, Kordas RL, Crim RN, Singh GG (2010). Meta-analysis reveals 

negative yet variable effects of ocean acidification on marine organisms. 

Ecology Letters 13: 1419-1434. 

Kvenvolden KA, Cooper CK (2003). Natural seepage of crude oil into the 

marine environment. Geographical Marine Letters 23: 140-146. 

Labansen A, Merkel FR, Boertmann D, Nyeland J (2010). Status of the blacklegged 

kittiwake (Rissa tridactyla) breeding population in Greenland, 2008. 

Polar Research 29: 391-403. 

Laidre KL, Heagerty PJ, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Witting L, Simon M (2009). 

Sexual segregation of common minke whales (Balaenoptera acutorostrata) in 

Greenland, and the influence of sea temperature on the sex ratio of catches. 

ICES Journal of Marine Science 66: 2253-2266. 

Laidre KL, Heide-Jørgensen MP (2005). Winter feeding intensity of narwhals 

(Monodon monoceros). Marine Mammal Science 21: 45-57. 

257

258 

Laidre KL, Heide-Jørgensen MP (2011). Life in the lead: extreme densities of 

narwhals Monodon monoceros in the offshore pack ice. Marine Ecology 

Progress Series 423: 269-278. 

Laidre KL, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Heagerty P, Cossio A, Bergstrom B, Simon 

M (2010). Spatial associations between large baleen whales and their prey in 

West Greenland. Marine Ecology Progress Series 402: 269-284. 

Laidre KL, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Jorgensen OA, Treble MA (2004). Deepocean 

predation by a high Arctic cetacean. ICES Journal of Marine Science 

61: 430-440. 

Laidre KL, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Nielsen TG (2007). Role of the bowhead 

whale as a predator in West Greenland. Marine Ecology Progress Series 346: 

285-297. 

Laidre KL, Stirling I, Lowry LF, Wiig O, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Ferguson SH 

(2008). Quantifying the sensitivity of arctic marine mammals to climateinduced 

habitat change. Ecological Applications 18: S97-S125. 

Larsen F, Martin AR, Nielsen PB (1989). North Atlantic Sightings Survey 

1987. Report of the West Greenland aerial survey. Cambridge. Report of the 

International Whaling Commision No. 39, p 443-446. 

Law RJ, Moffat CF (2011). The Braer oil spill, 1993. In: Fingas M (ed) Oil spill 

science and technology. Elsevier, p. 1119-1126. 

Lee K, Azetsu-Scott K, Cobanli SE, Dalziel J, Niven S, Wohlgeschaffen G, 

Yeats P (2005). Overview of potential impacts from produced water 

discharges in Atlantic Canada. In: al. Ae (ed) Offshore oil and gas 

environmental effects monitoring Approaches and technologies. Batelle 

Press, Columbus, Ohio, p. 319-342. 

Lee RF, Hagen W, Kattner G (2006). Lipid storage in marine zooplankton. 


Lefebvre L, Brêthes JC (1991). Orientation of movements of tagged, male, 

snow crabs (Chionoecetes opilio) in the southwestern Gulf of St. Lawrence. 


Lehtonen KK, Schiedek D, Koehler A, Lang T, Vuorinen PJ, Förlin L, 

Barsiene J, Pempkowiak J, Gercken J (2006). BEEP project in the Baltic Sea: 

overview of results and outlines for a regional biological effects monitoring 

strategy. Marine Pollution Bulletin 53: 523-537. 

Letcher RJ, Bustnes JO, Dietz R, Jenssen BM, Jørgensen EH, Sonne C, 

Verreault J, Vijayan MM, Gabrielsen GW (2010). Exposure and effects 

assessment of persistent organohalogen contaminants in arctic wildlife and 

fish. Science of the Total Environment 408: 2995-3043. 

LGL (2005). Husky delineation/exploration drilling program for Jeanne 

d’Arc Basin area environmental assessment. . LGL Limited, Canning and Pitt 

Associates, Inc., PAL Environmental Services. St. John's. LGL Report SA845.

Lick R, Piatkowski U (1998). Stomach contents of a northern bottlenose 

whale (Hyperoodon ampullatus) stranded at Hiddensee, Baltic sea. Journal of 

the Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 78: 643-650. 

Lie KK, Meier S, Olsvik PA (2009). Effects of environmental relevant doses of 

pollutants from offshore oil production on Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua). 

Comparative Biochemistry and Physiology Part C: Toxicology & 

Pharmacology 150: 141-149. 

Lippert H, Iken K, Rachor E, Wiencke C (2001). Macrofauna associated with 

macroalgae in the Kongsfjord (Spitsbergen). Polar Biology 24: 512-522. 

Ljungblad D, Thompson PO, Moore SE (1982). Underwater sounds recorded 

from migrating bowhead whales, Balaena mysticetus, in 1979. Journal of the 

Acoustical Society of America 71: 477-482. 

Ljungblad DK, Wursig B, Swartz SL, Keene JM (1988). Observations on the 

behavioral responses of bowhead whales (Balaena mysticetus) to active 

geophysical vessels in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea. Arctic 41: 183-194. 

Lockyer C, Heide-Jørgensen MP, Jensen J, Walton MJ (2003). Life history and 

ecology of harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena, L.) from West Greenland. 

NAMMCO Scientific Publications 5: 177-194. 

Løkkeborg S, Ona E, Vold A, Pena H, Salthaug A, Totland B, Øvredal JT, 

Dalen J, Handegard NO (2010). Effects of seismic surveys on fish fish 

distribution and catch rates of gillnets and longlines in Vesterålen in 

summer 2009. Havforskningsinstituttet, Bergen. Fisken og Havet 2/2010 (In 

Norwegian with summary in English). 

Lopez JC, Lopez D (1985). Killer whales (Orcinus orca) of Patagonia, and 

their behavior of intentional stranding while hunting nearshore. Journal of 

Mammalogy 66: 181-183. 

Lorentsen S-H, Sjøtun K, Grémillet D (2010). Multi-trophic consequences of 

kelp harvest. Biological Conservation 143: 2054-2062. 

Lunn N, Vongraven D, Schliebe S, Belikov SE (2010). Polar bears. In: CAFF 

(ed) Arctic Biodiversity Trends 2010 – Selected indicators of change. CAFF 

International Secretariat, Akureyri, Iceland. 

Lyngs P (2003). Migration and winter ranges of birds in Greenland - an 

analysis of ringing recoveries. Dansk Ornitologisk Forenings Tidsskrift 97: 1- 

167. 

Lyrholm T, Gyllensten U (1998). Global matrilineal population structure in 

sperm whales as indicated by mitochondrial DNA sequences. Proceedings of 

the Royal Society of London Series B - Biological Sciences 265: 1679-1684. 

Macdonald RW, Harne TJ, Fyfe (2005). Recent climate change in the Arctic 

and its impact on contaminant pathways and interpretation of temporal 

trend data. Science of the Total Environment 342: 5–86. 

259

260 

MacNeil MA, Graham NAJ, Cinner JE, Dulvy NK, Loring PA, Jennings S, 

Polunin NCV, Fisk AT, McClanahan TR (2010). Transitional states in marine 

fisheries: adapting to predicted global change. Philosophical Transactions of 

the Royal Society B 365: 3753-3763. 

Madsen PT, Johnson M, Miller P, Aguilar de Soto N, P. T (2006). 

Quantitative measures of airgun pulses impinging on sperm whales using 

onboard tags and controlled exposures. Journal of the Acoustical Society of 

America 120: 2366-2379. 

Madsen PT, Wahlberg M, Møhl B (2002). Male sperm whale (Physeter 

macrocephalus) acoustics in a high-latitude habitat: implications for 

echolocation and communication. Behavioural Ecology and Sociobiology 53: 

31-41. 

Madsen SD, Nielsen TG, Hansen BW (2008). Annual population 

development and production by small copepods in Disko Bay, western 

Greenland. Marine Biology 155: 63-77. 

Martin AR, Clarke MR (1986). The diet of sperm whales (Physeter 

macrocephalus) captured between Iceland and Greenland. Journal of the 

Marine Biological Association of the United Kingdom 66: 779-790. 

Matkin CO, Saulitis EL, Ellis GM, Olesiuk P, Rice SD (2008). Ongoing 

population-level impacts on killer whales Orcinus orca following the ‘Exxon 

Valdez’ oil spill in Prince William Sound, Alaska. Marine Ecology Progress 

Series 356: 269-281. 

McBean G, Alekseev G, Chen D, Førland E, Fyfe J, Groisman PY, King R, 

Melling H, Vose R, Whitfield PH (2005). Arctic Climate: Past and Present. In: 

Arris L (ed) Arctic Climate Impact Assessment (ACIA) 2005. ACIA 

Secretariat and Cooperative Institute for Arctic Research, University of 

Alaska Fairbanks. Cambridge University Press, p. 21-60. 

McCauley RD, Fewtrell J, Popper AN (2003). High intensity anthropogenic 

sound damages fish ears. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 113: 

638-642. 

McCay DF (2003). Development and application of damage assessment 

modelling: example assessment for the North Cape oil spill. Marine 

Pollution Bulletin 47: 341-359. 

McCay DPF, Gibson M, Cobb JS (2003a). Scaling restoration of American 

lobsters: combined demographic and discounting model for an exploited 

species. Marine Ecology Progress Series 264: 197-212. 

McCay DPF, Peterson CH, DeAlteris JT, Catena J (2003b). Restoration that 

targets function as opposed to structure: replacing lost bivalve production 

and filtration. Marine Ecology Progress Series 264: 177-196. 

Meier S, Klungsøyr J, Svardal A (2002). Alkylerte fenolers hormonelle 

innvirkning på torsk. Havforskningsinstituttet. Bergen. Unpublished Report, 

33 pp.

Melle W, Serigstad B, Ellertsen B (2001). Environmental risk of deep water 

oil drilling – A preliminary analysis. Senter for marint miljø, 

Havforskningsinstituttet, Bergen. Rapport nr. 1/2001. 

Mellinger DK, Carson CD, Clark CW (2000). Characteristics of minke whale 

(Balaenoptera acutorostrata) pulse trains recorded near Puerto Rico. Marine 

Mammal Science 16: 739-756. 

Mellinger DK, Stafford KM, Moore SE, Dziak RP, Matsumoto H (2007). An 

overview of fixed passive acoustic observation methods for cetaceans. 

Oceanography 20: 36-45. 

Merkel FR (2008). Bestandsstatus for ederfuglen i Ilulissat, Uummannaq og 

Upernavik kommuner, 2001 - 2007. Resultater fra overvågning gennemført 

af lokale optællere i samarbejde med Grønlands Naturinstitut. Greenland 

Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. Technical Report No. 73, 36 pp. 

Merkel FR (2010a). Evidence of recent population recovery in common 

eiders breeding in western Greenland. Journal of Wildlife Management 74: 

1869-1874. 

Merkel FR (2010b). Light-induced bird strikes on vessels in Southwest 

Greenland. Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. Technical 


Merkel FR, Jamieson SE, Falk K, Mosbech A (2007). The diet of Common 

Eiders wintering in Nuuk, Southwest Greenland. Polar Biology 30: 227-234. 

Merkel FR, Mosbech A, Boertmann D, Grøndahl L (2002). Winter seabird 

distribution and abundance off south-western Greenland, 1999. Polar 

Research 21: 17-36. 

Michel C, Nielsen TG, Nozais C, Gosselin M (2002). Significance of 

sedimentation and grazing by ice micro- and meiofauna for carbon cycling 

in annual sea ice (northern Baffin Bay). Aquatic Microbial Ecology 30: 57-68. 

Mikkelsen D, Rysgaard S, Glud R (2008). Microalgal composition and 

primary production in Arctic sea ice: a seasonal study from Kobbefjord 

(Kangerluarsunnguaq), West Greenland. Marine Ecology Progress Series: 65- 

74. 

Miller GW, Moulton VD, Davis RA, Holst M, Millman P, MacGillivray A, 

Hannay D (2005). Monitoring seismic effects on marine mammals – 

Southeastern Beaufort Sea 2001-2002. In: Armsworthy SL, Cranford PJ, Lee K 

(eds) Offshore oil and gas environmental effects monitoring Approaches and 

technologies. Batelle Press, Columbus, Ohio, p. 511-542. 

Miller LA, Pristed J, Møhl B, Surlykke A (1995). The click-sounds of 

narwhals (Monodon monoceros) in Inglefield Bay, Northwest Greenland. 

Marine Mammal Science 11: 491-502. 

261

262 

Moles A, Stone RP (2002). Habitat preferences of juvenile tanner and red 

king crabs: Substrate and crude oil. In: Paul AJ, Dawe EG, Elner R, Jamieson 

GS, Kruse GH, Otto RS, SainteMarie B, Shirley TC, Woodby D (eds) Crabs in 

Cold Water Regions: Biology, Management, and Economics, Vol 19. Lowell 

Wakefield Fisheries Symposia Series, p. 631-644. 

Møller EF, Thor P, Nielsen TG (2003). Production of DOC by Calanus 

finmarchicus, C. glacialis and C. hyperboreus through sloppy feeding and 

leakage from fecal pellets. Marine Ecology Progress Series 262: 185-191. 

Moller PR, Nielsen JG, Knudsen SW, Poulsen JY, Sunksen K, Jorgensen OA 

(2010). A checklist of the fish fauna of Greenland waters. Zootaxa: 1-84. 

Molnar J, Gamboa R, Revenga C, Spalding M (2008). Assessing the global 

threat of invasive species to marine biodiversity. Frontiers in Ecology and 

the Environment 6: 485–492. 

Mortensen P, Buhl-Mortensen L (2004). Distribution of deep-water 

gorgonian corals in relation to benthic habitat features in the Northeast 

Channel (Atlantic Canada). Marine Biology 144: 1223-1238. 

Mosbech A (ed) (2002). Potential environmental impacts of oil spills in 

Greenland. An assessment of information status and research needs. 

National Environmental Research Institute (NERI), Roskilde, Denmark. 

NERI Technical report No.415. 106 pp. 

Mosbech A, Anthonson KL, Blyth A, Boertmann D, Buch E, Cake D, 

Grøndahl L, Hansen KQ, Kapel H, Nielsen S, Platen FV, Potter S, Rasch M 

(2000). Environmental oil spill sensitivity atlas for the West Greenland 

coastal zone. The Danish Energy Agency, Ministry of Environment and 

Energy. Copenhagen. Technical Report (CD version) 279 pp. 

Mosbech A, Boertmann D, Jespersen M (2007). Strategic environmental 

impact assessment of hydrocarbon activities in the Disko West area. 

National Environmental Research Institute. Roskilde. NERI Technical Report 

No. 618, 187 pp. 

Mosbech A, Boertmann D, Olsen BØ, Olsvig S, Platen FV, Buch E, Hansen 

KQ, Rasch M, Nielsen N, Møller HS, Potter S, Andreasen C, Berglund J, 

Myrup M (2004a). Environmental oil spill sensitivity atlas for the South 

Greenland coastal zone. National Environmental Research Institute (NERI). 

Roskilde, Denmark. NERI Technical Report No. 493, 341 pp. 

Mosbech A, Boertmann D, Olsen BØ, Olsvig S, Platen FV, Buch E, Hansen 

KQ, Rasch M, Nielsen N, Møller HS, Potter S, Andreasen C, Berglund J, 

Myrup M (2004b). Environmental oil spill sensitivity atlas for the West 

Greenland (68°-72° N) coastal zone. National Environmental Research 

Institute (NERI). Roskilde, Denmark. NERI Technical Report No. 494, 442 

pp. 

Mosbech A, D. B, Nymand J, Riget F, M. A (1998). The Marine Environment 

in Southwest Greenland. Biological resources, resource use and sensitivity to 

oil spill. National Environmental Research Institute (NERI). Roskilde, 

Denmark. NERI Technical Report No. 236, 205 pp.

Mosbech A, Danø R, Merkel FR, Sonne C, Gilchrist HG, Flagstad A (2006a). 

Use of satellite telemetry to locate key habitats for King Eiders Somateria 

spectabilis in West Greenland. In: Boere CG, Galbraith C, Stroud DA (eds) 

Waterbirds around the world. The Stationery Office, Edinburgh, p 769-776. 

Mosbech A, Dietz R, Boertmann D, Johansen P (1996a). Oil exploration in the 

Fylla Area. An initial assessment of potential environmental impacts. 

National Environmental Research Institute (NERI). Copenhagen, Denmark. 

NERI Technical Report No. 156, 92 pp. 

Mosbech A, Dietz R, Boertmann D, Johansen P (1996b). Oil exploration in 

the Fylla area. An initial assessment of the potential environmental impacts. 

National Environmental Research Institute (NERI), University of Aarhus, 

Denmark. Roskilde. NERI Technical Report No. 156, 92 pp. 

Mosbech A, Gilchrist HG, Merkel FR, Sonne C, Flagstad A, Nyegaard H 

(2006b). Year-round movements of Northerns Common Eiders Somateria 

mollissima borealis breeding in Arctic Canada and West Greenland followed 

by satellite telemetry. Ardea 94: 651-665. 

Mosbech A, Johnson SR (1999). Late winter distribution and abundance of 

sea-associated birds in south-western Greenland, the Davis Strait and 

southern Baffin Bay. Polar Research 18: 1-17. 

Muir DCG, de Wit CA (2010). Trends of legacy and new persistent organic 

pollutants in the circumpolar arctic: Overview, conclusions, and 

recommendations. Science of the Total Environment 408: 2851-3051. 

Müller R, Laepple T, Barsch I, Wiencke C (2009). Impact of oceanic warming 

on the distribution of seaweeds in polar and cold-temperate waters. Botanica 

Marina 52: 617-638. 

Munk P, Hansen BW, Nielsen TG, Thomsen HA (2003). Changes in plankton 

and fish larvae communities across hydrographic fronts off West Greenland. 

Journal of Plankton Research 25: 815-830. 

Munk P, Nielsen TG, Hansen BW (2000). Spatial patterns in growth rate 

variability of Arctic cod in Disko Bay, West Greenland. ICES annual meeting 

2000. ICES Report CM2000/N:22. 

Murua H, Saborido-Rey F (2003). Female reproductive stragies of marine 

fish species of the Northwest Atlantic. Journal of Northwater Atlantic 

Fishery Science 33: 23-31. 

Muus B, Nielsen JG (1998). Havfisk og fiskeri i Nordvesteuropa. Gads forlag, 

Copenhagen. 

Myers PG, Donnelly C, Ribergaard MH (2009). Structure and variability of 

the West Greenland Current in summer derived from 6 repeat standard 

sections. Progress in Oceanography 80: 93-112. 

Nahrgang J, Camus L, Broms F, Christiansen JS, Hop H (2010a). Seasonal 

baseline levels of physiological and biochemical parameters in polar cod 

(Boreogadus saida): Implications for environmental monitoring. Marine 

Pollution Bulletin 60: 1336-1345. 

263

264 

Nahrgang J, Camus L, Carls MG, Gonzalez P, Jonsson M, Taban IC, 

Bechmann RK, Christiansen JS, Hop H (2010b). Biomarker responses in polar 

cod (Boreogadus saida) exposed to the water soluble fraction of crude oil. 

Aquatic Toxicology 97: 234-242. 

Nahrgang J, Camus L, Gonzalez P, Goksoyr A, Christiansen JS, Hop H 

(2009). PAH biomarker responses in polar cod (Boreogadus saida) exposed to 

benzo(a)pyrene. Aquatic Toxicology 94: 309-319. 

Nahrgang J, Camus L, Gonzalez P, Jonsson M, Christiansen JS, Hop H 

(2010c). Biomarker responses in polar cod (Boreogadus saida) exposed to 

dietary crude oil. Aquatic Toxicology 96: 77-83. 

Nahrgang J, Jonsson M, Camus L (2010d). EROD activity in liver and gills of 

polar cod (Boreogadus saida) exposed to waterborne and dietary crude oil. 

Marine Environmental Research 70: 120-123. 

Nakken O (1922). Scientific Basis for Management of Fish Resources with 

Regard to Seismic Exploration. Fisheries and Offshore Petroleum 

Exploitation, Proceedings of Petropiscis, Second International Conference, 

Bergen, Norway. 

NAMMCO (2009). Meeting Report of the NAMMCO Scientific Committee 

on Atlantic Walrus, 23-26 November 2009, Copenhagen. 23 pp. 

NAMMCO (2010). NAMMCO Annual Report 2009. North Atlantic Marine 

Mammal Commission. Tromsø, Norway. 529 pp. 

NAMMCO ( 2008). Status of marine mammals in the North Atlantic. The 

beluga whale. 

http://www.nammco.no/webcronize/images/Nammco/667.pdf. 

Nazareth J, Steensboe J (1998). Physical environment of eastern Davis Strait 

and northeastern Labrador Sea. An overview. Mineral Resources 

Administration for Greenland (MRA) and Danish Meteorological Institute 

(DMI). Technical Report No. 97-9, 35 pp. 

Neff JM (1987). Biological effects of drilling fluids, drill cuttings and 

produced water. In: Boesch DF, Rabalais NN (eds) Long-term 

Environmental Effects of Offshore Oil and Gas Development. Elsevier 

Applied Science, London and New York, p. 469-538. 

Nielsen J (1961). Contribution to the biology of the Salmonidae in Greenland 

I-V. Meddelelser om Grønland, Bioscience 159: 7-23. 

Nielsen JW, Kliem N, Jespersen M, Christiansen BM (2006). Oil drift and fate 

modelling at Disko Bay. Danish Meteorological Institute, Denmark. 

Technical Report No. 06-06. 

Nielsen JW, Murawski J, Kliem N (2008). Oil drift and fate modelling off NE 

and NW Greenland. Danish Meteorological Institute, Denmark. Technical 

Report No. 08-12.

Nielsen OK, Lyck E, Mikkelsen MH, Hoffmann L, Gyldenkærne S, Winther 

M, Nielsen M, Fauser P, Thomsen M, Plejdrup MS, Albrektsen R, Hjelgaard 

K, Johannsen VK, Vesterdal L, Rasmussen E, Arfaoui K, Baunbæk L (2010). 

Denmark’s National Inventory Report 2010. Emission Inventories 1990-2008 

- Submitted under the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate 

Change and the Kyoto Protocol. National Environmental Research Institute, 

Aarhus University. NERI Technical Report No 784. 

http://www.dmu.dk/Pub/FR784.pdf 

NMFS (2002). Biological opinion. Endangered Species Act-Section 7. 

Consultation and Operation of the Liberty Oil Production Island. National 

Marine Fisheries Service. Anchorage. Consultation No. F/AKR/2001/00889, 

51 pp. 

NMFS (2003). Taking marine mammals incidental to conducting oil and gas 

exploration activities in the Gulf of Mexico. National Marine Fisheries 

Service Federal Register 68: 9991-9996. 

NMFS (2005). Small takes of marine mammals incidental to specified 

activities: Marine seismic survey of the Aleutian Islands in the North Pacific 

Ocean. Notice of issuance of an incidental take authorization. National 

Marine Fisheries Service Federal Register 70: 901-913. 

NOAA (2010). A draft supplemental environmental impact statement for the 

Exxon Valdez oil spill restoration plan. US National Oceanic and 

Atmosphaeric Administration. 66 pp. 

NOAA (2011a). Deepwater Horizon/BP Oil Spill Information. 

http://sero.nmfs.noaa.gov/deepwater_horizon_oil_spill.htm. 

NOAA (2011b). Impacts of oil on marine mammals and sea turtles. Fact 

sheet. http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/pr/pdfs/health/oil_impacts.pdf. 

Norderhaug KM, Christie H, Fosså JH, Fredriksen S (2005). Fish-macrofauna 

interactions in a kelp (Laminaria hyperborea) forest. Journal of the Marine 

Biological Association of the United Kingdom 85: 1279-1286. 

Norris KS (1977). Whales, dolphins, and porpoises. University of California 

Press, London. 

North WJ (1967). Tampico; a study of destruction and restoration. Sea Front 

13: 212-217. 

Nowacek DP, Thorne LH, Johnston DW, Tyack PL (2007). Responses of 

cetaceans to anthropogenic noise. Mammal Review 37: 81-115. 

Nygaard R, Jørgensen OA (2010). Biomass and abundance of demersal fish 

stocks off West Greenland estimated from the Greenland shrimp survey, 

1988-2009. Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Organization. Dartmouth, Canada. 

NAFO Scientific Council Research Document No. 10/30. 

Nygaard R, Lyberth B, Boje J (2010). An assessment of the Greenland halibut 

stock component in NAFO Division 1A inshore. Northwest Atlantic 


Research Document No. 10/30. 

265

266 

Obbard ME, Thiemann GW, E. P, DeBruyn T (2010). Proceedings of 15th 

Working Meeting of the Polar Bear Specialist Group, Copenhagen, 

Denmark. IUCN. Gland, Switzerland and Cambridge, UK. IUCN 

Occassional Papers of the IUCN Species Survival Commission No. 43, 225 

pp. 

OED (2006). Sameksistens mellom fiskerinæringen og oljevirksomheten i 

området Lofoten-Barentshavet innenfor rammen af en bærekraftig utvikling. 

Olje- og enenergidepartementet, Oslo. 

OLF (2005). Environmental Report 2004. The Norwegian Oil industry 

Association. Stavanger. Unpublished Report. 

Olsen GH, Carroll J, Sva E, Camus L (2008). Cellular energy allocation in the 

Arctic sea ice amphipod Gammarus wilkitzkii exposed to the water soluble 

fractions of oil. Marine Environmental Research 66: 213-214. 

Olsen GH, Sva E, Carroll J, Camus L, De Coen W, Smolders R, Øveraas H, 

Hylland K (2007). Alterations in the energy budget of Arctic benthic species 

exposed to oil-related compounds. Aquatic Toxicology 83: 85-92. 

Olsgaard F, Gray J (1995). A comprehensive analysis of the effects of 

offshore oil and gas exploration and production on the benthic communities 

of the Norwegian continental shelf. Marine Ecology Progress Series 122: 277- 

306. 

Orr CD, Parsons JL (1982). Ivory gulls, Pagophila eburnea, and ice edges in 

Davis Strait and the Labrador Sea. Canadian Field-Naturalist 96: 323-328. 

Orr JC, Fabry VJ, Aumont O, Bopp L, Doney SC, Feely RA, Gnanadesikan A, 

Gruber N, Ishida A, Joos F, Key RM, Lindsay K, Maier-Reimer E, Matear R, 

Monfray P, Mouchet A, Najjar RG, Plattner GK, Rodgers KB, Sabine CL, 

Sarmiento JL, Schlitzer R, Slater RD, Totterdell IJ, Weirig MF, Yamanaka Y, 

Yool A (2005). Anthropogenic ocean acidification over the twenty-first 

century and its impact on calcifying organisms. Nature 437: 681-686. 

Østby C, Nordstrøm L, Moe KA (2003). Konsekvenser av seismisk aktivitet. 

Alpha Miljørådgivning. Oslo, Norway. ULB delutredning 18. 

Outridge PMRW, Macdonald RW, Wang F, Stern GA, Dastoor AP (2008). A 

mass balance inventory of mercury in the Arctic Ocean. Environmental 

Chemistry 5: 89-111. 

Overrein Ø (2002). Virkninger av motorferdsel på fauna og vegetasjon. 

Norsk Polarinstitutt, Tromsø. Rapportserie nr. 119. 

Paetkau D, Amstrup SC, Born EW, Calvert W, Derocher AE, Garner GW, 

Messier F, Stirling I, Taylor MK, Wiig Ø, Strobeck C (1999). Genetic structure 

of the world's polar bear populations. Molecular Ecology 8: 1571-1584. 

PAME (2009). Arctic offshore oil and gas guidelines. Protection of the Arctic 

Marine Environment (PAME), Arctic Council. Akureyri. 

Parkinson CL (2000). Variability of Arctic sea ice: The view from space, an 

18-year record. Arctic 53: 341-358.

Parry GD, Gason A (2006). The effect of seismic surveys on catch rates of 

rock lobsters in western Victoria, Australia. Fisheries Research 79: 272-284. 

Paul AJ, Paul JM (1997). Breeding success of large male red king crab 

Paralithodes camtschaticuswith multiparous mates. Journal of Shellfish 

Research 16: 379-381. 

Pawłowska J, Włodarska-Kowalczuk M, Zajączkowski M, Nygård H, Berge J 

(2011). Seasonal variability of meio- and macrobenthic standing stocks and 

diversity in an Arctic fjord (Adventfjorden, Spitsbergen). Polar Biology: 1-13. 

Payne K, Payne RS (1985). Large scale changes over 19 years in songs of 

humpback whales in Bermuda. Zeitschrift für Tierpsychologie 68: 89-114. 

Payne MP, Heinemann DW (1993). The distribution of Pilot whales 

(Globecephala spp.) in shelf/shelf-edge and slope waters of the Northeastern 

United States 1978-1988. Cambridge. Report of the International Whaling 

Commision Special Issue No. 14, p. 51-68. 

Pedersen PM (1976). Marine, benthic algae from southernmost Greenland. 

Meddelelser om Grønland 199: 1-80. 

Pedersen PM (2011). Grønlands havalger. ForlagetEpsilon.dk, Denmark. 

Pedersen SA, Kanneworff P (1995). Fish on the West Greenland shrimp 

grounds, 1988-1992. ICES Journal of Marine Science 52: 165-182. 

Pedersen SA, Ribergaard MH, Simonsen CS (2005). Micro- and 

mesozooplankton in Southwest Greenland waters in relation to 

environmental factors. Journal of Marine Systems 56: 85-112. 

Pedersen SA, Rice JC (2002). Dynamics of fish larvae, zooplankton, and 

hydrographical characteristics in the west Greenland large marine 

ecosystem 1950-1984. Large Marine Ecosystems of the North Atlantic: 

Changing States and Sustainability: 151-193. 

Pedersen SA, Smidt ELB (2000). Zooplankton distribution and abundance in 

West Greenland waters 1950-1984. Journal of Northwest Atlantic Fishery 

Science 26: 45-102. 

Pedersen SA, Storm L (2002). Pandalus borealis recruitment in West 

Greenland waters. Part II. Lipid classes and fatty acids in Pandalus borealis 

shrimp larvae: Implication for survival expectations and trophic 

relationships. Journal of Northwater Atlantic Fishery Science 30: 47-60. 

Pedersen SA, Storm L, Simonsen CS (2002). Northern shrimp (Pandalus 

borealis) recruitment in West Greenland waters part I. Distribution of 

Pandalus shrimp larvae in relation to hydrography and plankton Journal of 

Northwest Atlantic Fishery Science 30: 19-46. 

Percy JA, Mullin TC (1975). Effects of crude oils on arctic marine 

invertebrates Environment Canada. Victoria, British Columbia. Beaufort Sea 

Technical Report No. 11, 167 pp. 

267

268 

Perez C, Velando A, Munilla I, Lopez-Alonso M, Oro D (2008). Monitoring 

polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon pollution in the marine environment after 

the Prestige oil spill by means of seabird blood analysis. Environmental 

Science and Technology 2008: 707-713. 

Perry EA, Stenson GB (1992). Observations on nursing behavior of hooded 

seals, Cystophora cristata. Behaviour 122: 1-10. 

Petersen DG, Dahllöf I (2007). Combined effects of pyrene and UV-light on 

algae and bacteria in an arctic sediment. Ecotoxicology 16: 371-377. 

Petersen DG, Reichenberg F, Dahllöf I (2008). Phototoxicity of pyrene affects 

benthic algae and bacteria from the Arctic. Environmental Science and 

Technology 42: 1371-1376. 

Petersen S, Ferguson S, Matthews (2009). First killer whales to be tagged in 

the Eastern Canadian Arctic. Aarluk News 2: 2-3. 

Peterson C, H., Rice SD, Short JW, Esler D, Bodkin JL, Ballachey BE, B. ID 

(2003). Long-term ecosystem response to the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Science 

302: 2082-2086. 

Picado A, Bebianno MJ, Costa MH, Ferreira A, Vale A (2007). Biomarkers: a 

strategic tool in the assessment of environmental quality of coastal waters. 

Hydrobiologica 587: 79-87. 

Piepenburg D (2005). Recent research on Arctic benthos: common notions 

need to be revised. Polar Biology 28: 733-755. 

Piepenburg D, Ambrose W, Brandt A, Renaud P, Ahrens M, Jensen P (1997). 

Benthic community patterns reflect water column processes in the Northeast 

Water polynya (Greenland). Journal of Marine Systems 10: 467-482. 

Piepenburg D, Archambault P, Ambrose Jr WG, Blanchard A, Bluhm BA, 

Carroll ML, Conlan KE, Cusson M, Feder HM, Grebmeier JM, Jewett SC, 

Lévesque M, Petryashov VV, Sejr MK, Sirenko BI, Wlodarska-Kowalczuk M 

(2010). Towards a pan-Arctic inventory of the species diveristy of the macro- 

and megabenthic fauna of the Arctic shelf areas. Marine Biodiversity. 

Pike DG, Vikingsson GA, Gunnlaugsson T, Øien N (2010). A note on the 

distribution and abundance of blue whales (Balaenoptera musulus) in the 

central and Northeast North Atlantic. NAMMCO Scientific Publications 7: 

19-29. 

Pilot M, Dahlheim ME, Hoelzel AR (2009). Social cohesion among kin, gene 

flow without dispersal and the evolution of population genetic structure in 

the killer whale (Orcinus orca). Journal of Evolutionary Biology 23: 20-31. 

Pitman RL, Ensor P (2003). Three different forms of killer whales in Antarctic 

waters. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 5: 131-139. 

Poot H, Ens BJ, de Vries H, Donners MAH, Wernand MR, Marquenie JM 

(2008). Green light for nocturnally migrating birds. Ecology and Society 13: 

47.

Popper AN, Fewtrell J, Smith ME, McCauley RD (2004). Anthropogenic 

sound: Effects on the behavior and physiology of fishes. Marine Technology 

Society Journal 37: 35-40. 

Pörtner HO, Peck M (2010). Climate change impacts on fish and fisheries: 

towards a cause and effect understanding. Journal of Fish Biology 77: 1745- 

1779. 

Puebla O, Sévigny J-M, Sainte-Marie B, Brêthes JCF, Burmeister A, Dawe EG, 

Moriyasu M (2008). Population genetic structure of the snow crab 

(Chionoecetes opilio) at the Northwest Atlantic scale. Canadian Journal of 


Quillfeldt CHv, Hegseth EN, Johnsen G, Sakshaug E, Syvertsen EE (2009). 

Ice algae. In: Sakshaug E, Johnsen G, Kovacs K (eds) Ecosystem Barents Sea. 

Tapir Academic Press, Trondheim. 

Ramp C, Bérubé M, Hagen W, Sears R (2006). Survival of adult blue whales 

Balaenoptera musculus in the Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada. Ecological 

Progress Report 319: 287-295. 

Rankin S, Barlow J (2007). Vocalizations of the sei whale Balaenoptera borealis 

off the Hawaiian islands. Bioacoustics 16. 

Rasmussen LM (2010). Ynglefugle ved Akia, Vestgrønland, juni 2009. 

Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. Technical Report No. 82, 30 

pp. 

Rasmussen LM (2011). Ynglende havfugle i Sydvestgrønland, 2009-2011. 

Greenland Institute of Natural Resources. Nuuk. Technical Report No. 86, 51 

pp. 

Rasmussen MH (1999). Hvidnæsens lydproduktion, adfærd samt 

udbredelse. Master Thesis, University of Odense. 

Rasmussen MH, Miller LA (2002). Whistles and clicks from white-beaked 

dolphins, Lagenorhynchus albirostris, recorded in Flaxaflói Bay, Iceland. 

Aquatic Mammals 28: 78-89. 

Rasmussen RO (2005). Analyse af fangererhvervet i Grønland. Department 

of Fisheries and Hunting, Greenland Home Rule. Nuuk. Unpublished 

Report, 158 pp. 

Ray JP, Engelhardt FR (1992). Produced water. Technological/Environmental 

Isues and Solutions. Plenum Press, New York and London. 

Reeves RR, Ljungblad DK, Clarke JT (1984). Bowhead whales and acoustic 

seismic surveys in the Beaufort Sea. Polar Record 22: 271-280. 

Reeves RR, Smeenk C, Kinze CC, Brownell RL, Lien J (1999). White-beaked 

dolphin - Lagenorhynchus albirostris (Gray, 1846). In: Ridgway SH, Harrison 

SR (eds) Handbook of marine mammals Vol 6. Academic Press, London, p. 1 

– 30. 

269

270 

Renaud PE, Jensen T, Wassbotten I, Mannvik HP, Botnen H (2007). Offshore 

sediment monitoring on the Norwegian shelf. A regional approach 1996- 

2006. Akvaplan-niva report No. 3487-003. 

Rendell LE, Gordon J (1999). VOcal response of long-finned pilot whales 

(Globicephala melas) to military sonar in the Ligurian Sea. Marine Mammal 

Science 15: 198-204. 

Ribergaard MH (2010). Oceanographic investigations off West Greenland 

2009. Danish Meteorological Institute (DMI), Centre for Ocean and Ice (COI), 

Copenhagen, Denmark. Unpublished Report, 52 pp. 

Ribergaard MH, Pedersen SA, Adlandsvik B, Kliem N (2004). Modelling the 

ocean circulation on the West Greenland shelf with special emphasis on 

northern shrimp recruitment. Continental Shelf Research 24: 1505-1519. 

Ribergaard MH, Wilkenskeld S, Nielsen JW (2010). Ensemble oil drift 

modeling off Southwest Greenland. Danish Meteorological Insitute. 

Copenhagen. Technical Report No. 10-19, 40 pp. 

Rice SD, Spies RB, Wolfe DA, Wright BA (1996). Proceedings of the Exxon 

valdez Oil Spill Symposium. American Fisheries Society, Maryland. 

Richard PR, Laake JL, Hobbs RC, Heide-Jorgensen MP, Asselin NC, Cleator 

H (2010). Baffin Bay Narwhal population distribution and numbers: Aerial 

surveys in the Canadian High Arctic, 2002-04. Arctic 63: 85-99. 

Richardson WJ, Greene CRJ, Malme CI, Thomson DH (1995). Marine 

mammals and noise. Academic Press, San Diego, US. 

Richardson WJ, Hickie JP, Davis RA, Thomson DH (1989). Effects of offshore 

petroleum operations on cold water marine mammals: A literature review 

American Petroleum Institute (API). Health and Environmental Sciences 

Department King City, Ontario, Canada. Report prepared by LGL Ltd. 

Publication No. 4485, 385 pp. 

Richardson WJ, Wursig B, Greene CRJ (1986). Reactions of bowhead whales, 

Balaena mysticetus, to seismic exploration in the Canadian Beaufort Sea. 

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 79: 1117-1128. 

Riget F, Boje J (1988). Hellefisk ved Vestgrønland, Godthåbsfjorden. 

Grønlands Fiskeriundersøgelser. Copenhagen. Unpublished Report. 

Rignot E, Kanagaratnam P (2006). Changes in the velocity structure of the 

Greenland ice sheet. Science: 986-990. 

Risch D, Clark CW, Corkeron PJ, Elepfandt A, Kovacs KM, Lydersen C, 

Stirling I, Van Parijs SM (2007). Vocalizations of male bearded seals, 

Erignathus barbatus: Classification and geographical variation. Animal 

Behaviour 73: 747-762.

Rivkin RB, Tian R, Anderson MR, Payne JF (2000). Ecosystem level effects of 

offshore platform discharges: Identification, assessment and modelling. 

Proceedings of the 27th Annual Aquatic Toxicity Workshop, St. John’s, 

Newfoundland, Canada, October 01–04, 2000. Canadian Technical Report of 

Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 2331: 3–12. 

Robert M, Mittelhauser GH, Jobin B, Fitzgerald G, Lamothe P (2008). New 

Insights on Harlequin Duck Population Structure in Eastern North America 

as Revealed by Satellite Telemetry. Waterbirds 31: 159-172. 

Røe TI, Johnsen S (1999). Bioavailability of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons 

in the North Sea. Environmental Science Technology 33: 1963-1969. 

Rosenvinge LKR (1893). Grønlands havalger. Meddelelser om Grønland 3: 

765-981. 

Rosenvinge LKR (1898). Deuxiéme mémoire sur les algues du Groenland. 

Meddelelser om Grønland 20: 1-125. 

Rosing-Asvid A (2008). A new harp seal whelping ground near South 

Greenland. Marine Mammal Science 24: 730-736. 

Rosing-Asvid A (2010). Seals of Greenland. Ilinniusiorfik Undervisningsmiddelforlag, 

Nuuk. 

Rosing-Asvid A (2010). Catch history and status of the harbour seal (Phoca 

vitulina) in Greenland. In: Desportes G, Bjørge A, Rosing-Asvid A, Waring G 

(eds) Harbour seals in the North Atlantic and the Baltic. NAMMCO 

Scientific Publications 8, p. 159-172. 

Rosing-Asvid A (2011). Status of harbor seals and grey seals in Greenland. 

NAMMCO. NAMMCO Working Group Paper on Coastal Seals, 12 pp. 

Ross SL (1992). Evaluation of the behaviour and cleanup of offshore oil-well 

blowout spills in west Greenland. S.L. Ross Ltd. 87 pp. 

Ross WG (1993). Commercial whaling in the North Atlantic sector. In: Burns 

JJ, Montague JJ, Cowles CJ (eds) The bowhead whale. Society for Marine 

Mammalogy. Special Publications No. 2. Allan Press. 

Rothrock DA, Yu Y, Maykut GA (1999). Thinning of the Arctic sea-ice cover. 

Geophysical Research Letters 26: 3469-3472. 

Ryals BM, Rubel EW (1988). Hair cell regeneration after acoustic trauma in 

adult Cortunix quail. Science 240: 1774-1776. 

Rye H, Nordtug T, Skognes K (2003). Spredning og deponering av kaks og 

slam. Spredning av producert vann med doser på organismer. Spredning av 

radioaktivitet. OED studie 5a og 5b – udredning Lofoten-Barentshavet. 

Sintef. Unpublished Report. 

271

272 

Rysgaard S, Arendt K, Frederiksen MS, Egevang C, Labansen A, Mortensen 

J, Simon M, Pedersen LF, Witting L, Bergstrøm B, Mikkelsen D (2008). Nuuk 

Basic: The MarineBasic Programme 2005–2006. In: Jensen LM, Rasch M (eds) 

Nuuk Ecological Research Operations, 1st Annual Report, 2007. Danish 

Polar Centre, Danish Agency for Science, Technology and Innovation, 

Ministry of Science, Copenhagen, p. 38–73. 

Rysgaard S, Glud RN (2007). Carbon cycling and climate change: 

Predeictions for a High Arctic marine ecosystem. Meddelelser om Grønland, 

Bioscience 58: 206-214. 

Rysgaard S, Kuhl M, Glud R, Hansen J (2001). Biomass, production and 

horizontal patchiness of sea ice algae in a high-Arctic fjord (Young Sound, 

NE Greenland). Marine Ecology Progress Series: 15-26. 

Sainte-Marie B (1993). Reproductive cycle and fecundity of primiparous and 

multiparous female snow crab, Chionoecetes opilio, in the Northwest Gulf of 

St. Lawrence. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 50: 2147- 

2156. 

Sainte-Marie B, Carriere C (1995). Fertilization of the second clutch of eggs of 

snow crab, Chionoecetes opilio, from females mated once or twice after their 

molt to maturity. Fishery Bulletin 93: 759-764. 

Sainte-Marie B, Hazel F (1992). Moulting and mating of snow crabs, 

Chionoecetes opilio (O. Fabricius), in shallow waters of the northwestern Gulf 

of St. Lawrence. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 49: 

1282-1293. 

Sainte-Marie B, Raymond S, Brêthes JC (1995). Growth and maturation of the 

benthic stages of male snow crab, Chionoecetes opilio (Brachyura: Majidae). 


Sainte-Marie B, Sevigny JM, Gauthier Y (1997). Laboratory behavior of 

adolescent and adult males of the snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio) (Brachyura: 

Majidae) mated noncompetitively and competitively with primiparous 

females. Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 54: 239-248. 

Sainte-Marie B, Urbani N, Sevigny JM, Hazel F, Kuhnlein U (1999). Multiple 

choice criteria and the dynamics of assortative mating during the first 

breeding season of female snow crab Chionoecetes opilio (Brachyura, Majidae). 


Sainte-Marie G, Sainte-Marie B (1999). Reproductive products in the adult 

snow crab (Chionoecetes opilio). II. Multiple types of sperm cells and of 

spermatophores in the spermathecae of mated females. Canadian Journal of 

Zoology 77: 451-462. 

Sainte-Marie G, Sainte-Marie B, Sévigny JM (2000). Ejaculate-storage 

patterns and the site of fertilization in female snow crabs (Chionoecetes opilio, 

Majidae). Journal of Canadian Zoology 78: 1902-1917. 

Salomonsen F (1950). The Birds of Greenland. Munksgaard, Copenhagen.

Schaaning MT, Trannum HC, Øxnevad S, Carroll JL, Bakke T (2008). Effects 

of drilling cuttings on biogeochemical fluxes and macrobenthos of marine 

sediments. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 361: 49-57. 

Scheifele PM, Andrew S, Cooper RA, Darre M, Musiek FE, Max L (2005). 

Indication of a Lombard vocal response in the St. Lawrence River beluga. 

Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 117: 1486-1492. 

Schick RS, Urban DL (2000). Spatial components of bowhead whale (Balaena 

mysticetus) distribution in the Alaskan Beaufort Sea686. Canadian Journal of 


Schiedek D, Sundelin B, Readman JW, Macdonald RW (2007). Interactions 

between climate change and contaminants (review). Marine Pollution 

Bulletin 54: 1845-1856. 

Schmidt-Etkin D (2011). Spill occurrences: A world overview In: Fingas M 

(ed) Oil spill science and technology. Elsevier, p. 7-47. 

Schreiber EA, Burger J (2002). Biology of marine Birds. CRC Press. 

Schrope M (2011). Deep wounds. Nature 472: 152-154. 

Scott CL, Kwasniewski S, Falk-Petersen S, Sargent JR (2000). Lipids and life 

strategies of Calanus finmarchicus, Calanus glacialis and Calanus hyperboreus in 

late autumn, Kongsfjorden, Svalbard. Polar Biology 23: 510-516. 

Sears R, Larsen F (2002). Long range movements of a blue whale 

(Balaenoptera musculus) between the Gulf of St. Lawrence and West 

Greenland. Marine Mammal Science 18: 281-285. 

Sejr M, Sand M, Jensen K, Petersen J, Christensen P, Rysgaard S (2002). 

Growth and production of Hiatella arctica (Bivalvia) in a High-Arctic fjord 

(Young Sound, Northeast Greenland). Marine Ecology Progress Series 244: 

163-169. 

Sejr M, Włodarska-Kowalczuk M, Legeżyńska J, Blicher M (2010a). 

Macrobenthic species composition and diversity in the Godthaabsfjord 

system, SW Greenland. Polar Biology 33: 421-431. 

Sejr MK, Batty P, A.B. J, Blicher ME, Hansen J, Rysgaard S (2010b). Survey of 

macrobenthic invertebrates in the eastern Baffin Bay including estimates of 

biogeochemical activity and PAH levels of the sediment. National 

Environmental Research Institute (NERI). Silkeborg, Denmark. Unpublished 

Report. 

Sejr MK, Christensen PB (2007). Growth, production and carbon demand of 

macrofauna in Young Sound, with special emphasis on the bivalves Hiatella 

arctica and Mya truncata In: Rysgaard S, Glud RN (eds) Carbon cycling in 

Arctic Marine ecosystems: Case study Young Sound Vol 58. Meddelelser om 

Grønland, Bioscience, Copenhagen, p. 214. 

Sejr MK, Jensen KT, Rysgaard S (2000). Macrozoobenthic community 

structure in a high-arctic East Greenland fjord. Polar Biology 23: 792-801. 

273

274 

Sergeant DE (1974). A rediscovered whelping population of Hooded Seals 

Cystiphora cristata erxleben and its possible relationship to other populations. 

Polarforschung 44: 1-7. 

Sergeant DE (1976). Research on hooded seals Cystiphora cristata erxleben in 

1976. ICNAF Research Document No. 76/126 Ser. No. 5132, 8 pp. 

Sergeant DE (1977). Research on hooded seals in the western North Atlantic 

in 1977. ICNAF Research Document No. 77/XI/57, 8 pp. 

Sergy GA, Blackall PJ (1987). Design and conclusion of the Baffin Island oil 

spill project. Arctic 40 (Suppl. 1): 1–9. 

Serrano A, Sánchez F, Preciado I, Parra S, Frutos I (2006). Spatial and 

temporal changes in benthic communities of the Galician continental shelf 

after the Prestige oil spill. Marine Pollution Bulletin 53: 315-331. 

SFT (2008). Kostnader og nytte for miljø og samfunn ved å stille krav om 

injeksjon/reinjeksjon av produsert vann, nullutslipp av borekaks og 

borevæske og inkludere radioaktivitet i nullutslippmålet. Statens Strålevern, 

Oljedirektoratet, Statens forureningstilsyn. 

http://www.klif.no/publikasjoner/2468/ta2468.pdf. 

Short JW, Harris PM (1996). Chemical sampling and analysis of petroleum 

hydrocarbons in near-surface seawater of Prince William Sound after the 

Exxon Valdez oil spill. In: Rice DS (ed) Proceedings of the Exxon Valdez oil 

spill symposium. American Fisheries Society, Bethesda, Maryland, p. 17-28. 

Short JW, Lindeberg MR, Harris PM, Maselko JM, Pella JJ, Rice SD (2004). 

Estimate of oil persisting on the beaches of Prince William Sound 12 years 

after the Exxon Valdez oil spill. Environmental Science and Technology 38: 

19-25. 

Simon M (2010). The sounds of whales and their food: Baleen whales, their 

foraging behaviour, ecology and habitat use in an arctic habitat. Ph.D. 

Thesis, Aarhus University, Denmark. 

Simon M, Stafford KM, Beedholm K, Lee CM, Madsen PT (2010). Singing 

behavior of fin whales in the Davis Strait with implications for mating, 

migration and foraging. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 128: 

3200-3210. 

Simon M, Wahlberg M, Miller LA (2007). Echolocation clicks from killer 

whales (Orcinus orca) feeding on herring (Clupea harengus) (L). Journal of the 

Acoustical Society of America 121: 749-752. 

Simonsen CS, Gundersen AC (2005). Ovary development in Greenland 

halibut Reinhardtius hippoglossoides in west Greenland waters. Journal of 

Fish Biology 67: 1299-1317. 

Simonsen CS, Munk P, Folkvord A, Pedersen SA (2006). Feeding ecology of 

Greenland halibut and sandeel larvae off West Greenland. Marine Biology 

149: 937-952.

Simpson AC, Howell BR, Warren PJ (1970). Synopsis of avilable data on the 

shrimp Pandalus montagui. FAO. FAO Fisheries Synopsis No. 92, p 1225-1249. 

Sjare B, Stirling I (1996). The breeding behavior of Atlantic walruses, 

Odobenus rosmarus rosmarus, in the Canadian High Arctic. Canadian Journal 

of Zoology 74: 897-911. 

Sjare B, Stirling I, Spencer C (2003). Structural variation in the songs of 

Atlantic walruses breeding in the Canadian High Arctic. Aquatic Mammals 

29: 297-318. 

Skjoldal HR, Thurston D, Baffrey M, Crandall B, Dahle G, Gilman A, 

Huntington HP, Klungsør J, Lockhart L, Macdonald CL, Mosbech A, 

Thomas D (2007). AMAP Oil and Gas Assessment. Chapter 7. Scientific 

findings and recommendations Arctic Council, http://www.amap.no/oga/. 

Slotte A, Hansen K, Dalen J, Ona E ( 2004). Acoustic mapping of pelagic fish 

distribution and abundance in relation to a seismic shooting area off the 

Norwegian west coast. Fisheries Research 67: 143-150. 

Smidt E (1969). The greenland halibut, Reinhardtius hippoglossoides (Walb.), 

biology and exploitation in greenland waters. Meddelelser fra Danmarks 

Fiskeri- og Havundersøgelser 6: 79-148. 

Smith SL, Schnack-Schiel SB (1990). Polar Zooplankton, Part B: Chemistry, 

Biology, and Geology. Academic Press, London. 

Smultea MA, Würsig B (1995). Behavioral reactions of bottlenose dolphins to 

the Mega Borg oil spill, Gulf of Mexico 1990. Aquatic Mammals 21: 171-181. 

Söderkvist J, Nielsen TG, Jespersen M (2006). Physical and biological 

oceanography in West Greenland waters with emphasis on shrimp and fish 

larvae distribution. National Environmental Research Institute (NERI), 

University of Aarhus. Roskilde, Denmark. NERI Technical Report No. 581, 

60 pp. 

Søndergaard J, Asmund G (2011). Environmental monitoring at the Seqi 

olivine mine 2010. National Environmental Research Institute, Aarhus 

University. NERI Technical Report No. 813, 36 pp. 

Sonne C (2010). Health effects from long-range transported contaminants in 

Arctic top predators: An integrated review based on studies of polar bears 

and relevant model species. Environment International 36: 461-491. 

Sorensen EF, Simonsen V (1988). Genetic differentiation among populations 

of capelin Mallotus villosus from the West coast of Greenland. Journal of 

Applied Ichthyology-Zeitschrift Fur Angewandte Ichthyologie 4: 23-28. 

Sousa A, Laranjeiro F, Takahashi S, Tanabe S, Barroso CM (2009). Imposex 

and organotin prevalence in a European post-legislative scenario: Temporal 

trends from 2003 to 2008. Chemosphere 77: 566-573. 

Spraker TR, Lowry LF, Frost KJ (1994). Gross necropsy and histopathological 

lesions found in harbor seals. In: Loughlin TR (ed) Marine mammals and the 

‘Exxon Valdez’. Academic Press, San Diego, CA, p. 281-312. 

275

276 

Squires HJ (1990). Decapod crustacea of the Atlantic coast of Canada. 

Fisheries and Oceans Canada. Ottawa, Ontario. Bulletin No. 221, 532 pp. 

St Aubin DJ (1990). Phyisiologic and toxic effects on pinnipeds. Academic 

Press, Toronto. 

St. Aubin DJ (1990). Phyisiologic and toxic effects on pinnipeds. In: Geraci 

JR, D.J. SA (eds) Sea mammals and oil Confronting the risks. Academic 

Press, p. 24. 

Stein M (2007). Warming periods off Greenland during 1800–2005: their 

potential influence on the abundance of cod (Gadus morhua) and Haddock 

(Melanogrammus aeglefinus) in Greenlandic waters. Journal Northwest 

Atlantic Fisheries Science 39: 1-20. 

Stenberg C (2007). Recruitment processes in West Greenland waters. With 

special focus on Greenland halibut (Reinhardtius hippoglossoides, W.). Ph.D 

Thesis, University of Bergen, Norway. 

Stewart REA (2008). Redefining walrus stocks in Canada. Arctic 61: 292-398. 

Stirling I, Parkinson CL (2006). Possible effects of climate warming on 

selected populations of polar bears (Ursus maritimus) in the Canadian Arctic. 

Arctic 59: 261-275. 

Stone CJ, Tasker ML (2006). The effects of seismic airguns on cetaceans in 

UK waters. Journal of Cetacean Research and Management 8: 255-263. 

Storr-Paulsen M, Wieland K, Hovgard H, Ratz HJ (2004). Stock structure of 

Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) in West Greenland waters: implications of 

transport and migration. ICES Journal of Marine Science 61: 972-982. 

Strand J, Asmund G (2003). Tributyl accumulation and effects in marine 

molluscs from West Greenland. Environmental Pollution 123: 31-37. 

Strand J, Larsen MM, Lockyer C (2005). Accumulation of organotin 

compounds and mercury in harbour porpoises (Phocoena phocoena) from the 

Danish waters and West Greenland. Science of the Total Environment 350: 

59-71. 

Sunnanå K (2005). Rognkjeks. In: Bakketeig I, Dommasnes A, Føyn L, Haug 

T, Iversen S, Røttingen I, Svendsen E, Torstensen E (eds) Havets Ressurser. 

Institute of Marine Research, Bergen, p. 128-130. 

Swalethorp R, Kjellerup S, Dünweber M, Nielsen TG, Møller EF, Rysgaard S, 

Hansen BW (2011). Grazing, production and biochemical evidence for 

differences in the life strategies of Calanus finmarchicus, C. glacialis and C. 

hyperboreus in Disko Bay, Western Greenland. Submitted to Marine Ecology- 

Progress Series. 

Tang CCL, Ross CK, Yao T, Petrie B, DeTracey BM, Dunlap E (2004). The 

circulation, water masses and sea-ice of Baffin Bay. Progress in 

Oceanography 63: 183-228.

Taylor MK, Akeeagok S, Andriashek D, Barbour W, Born EW, Calvert W, 

Cluff HD, Laake J, Rosing-Asvid A, Stirling I, Messier F (2001). Delineating 

Canadian and Greenland polar bear (Ursus maritimus) populations by 

cluster analysis of movements. Canadian Journal of Zoology 79: 690-709. 

Teilmann J, Dietz R (1998). Status of the harbour porpoise in Greenland. 

Polar Biology 19: 211-220. 

Teloni V, Mark JP, Patrick MJO, Peter MT (2008). Shallow food for deep 

divers: Dynamic foraging behavior of male sperm whales in a high latitude 

habitat. Journal of Experimental Marine Biology and Ecology 354: 119-131. 

Thibodeaux LJ, Valsaraj KT, John VT, Papadopoulos KD, Pratt LR, Pesika 

NS (2011). Marine Oil Fate: Knowledge Gaps, Basic Research, and 

Development Needs; A Perspective Based on the Deepwater Horizon Spill. 

Environmental Engineering Science 28: 87-93. 

Thompson RJ, Hawryluk M (1990). Physiological energetics of the snow 

crab, Chionoecetes opilio. In: Proceedings of the International Symposium on 

King and Tanner crabs. Alaska Sea Grant College program Report 90-04:283- 

291. 

Thomsen F, Franck D, Ford JKB (2001). Characteristics of whistles from the 

acoustic repertoire of resident killer whales (Orcinus orca) off Vancouver 

Island, British Columbia. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 109: 

1240-1246. 

Thormar J (2006). The rhodoliths of Disko Fjord, greenland: first visual 

record of the Lithothmanion glaciale / tophiforme (Corallinales, Rhodophyta) 

aggregation in Disko Fjord, 69 N, Greenland. In: Halberg KA (ed) Arctic 

Biology Field Course, Qeqartarsuaq 2006. Copenhagen University, p. 87-112. 

Turner JT (2002). Zooplankton fecal pellets, marine snow and sinking 

phytoplankton blooms. Aquatic Microbial Ecology 27: 57-102. 

Ugarte F (2011). Greenland Progress Report. North Atlantic Marine Mammal 

Commission. Tromsø, Norway. NAMMCO Annual Report 2010. 

Urick RJ (1983). Principles of underwater sound. Peninsula publishing, Los 

Altos. 

Valentine (2010). Propane respiration jump-starts microbial response to a 

deep oil spill. Science 330: 208-211. 

Valeur HH, Hansen C, Hansen KQ, Rasmussen L, Thingvad L (1996). 

Weather, sea and ice conditions in eastern Baffin Bay, offshore Northwest 

Greenland. A review. Danish Meteorological Institute. Copenhagen. 

Technical Report No. 96-12. 

Van der Oost R, Beyer J, Vermeulen NPE (2003). Fish bioaccumulation and 

biomarkers in environmental risk assessment: A review. Environmental 

Toxicology and Pharmacology 13: 57-149. 

Velicogna I (2009). Increasing rates of ice mass loss from the Greenland and 

Antarctic ice sheets revealed by GRACE Geographical Research Letters 36: 

277

278 

Velicogna I, Wahr J (2006). Acceleration of Greenland ice mass loss in spring 

2004. Nature: 329-331. 

Vibe C (1939). Preliminary investigations on shallow water animal 

communities in the Upernavik- and Thule-districts (Northwest Greenland). 

Meddelelser om Grønland, Bioscience 124: 1-42. 

Vibe C (1950). The marine mammals and the marine fauna in the Thule 

District (Northwest Greenland) with observations on the ice conditions in 

1939-41. Meddelelser om Grønland, Bioscience 150: 1-115. 

Vilhjalmsson H (2002). Capelin (Mallotus villosus) in the Iceland-East 

Greenland-Jan Mayen ecosystem. ICES Journal of Marine Science 59: 870- 

883. 

Vilhjálmsson H (1994). The Icelandic Capelin Stock. Journal of the Marine 

Research Institute: 279 pp. 

Villadsgaard A, Wahlberg M, Tougaard J (2007). Echolocation signals of 

wild harbour porpoises, Phocoena phocoena. The Journal of Experimental 

Biology 210: 56-64. 

Villumsen A, Ottosen LM (2006). Heavy metal and TBT contamination in the 

sediment around Sisimiut, Greenland. Department of Civil Engineering, 

Technical University of Denmark, Lyngby. In: The Greenlandic 

Environment, Pollution and Solutions, p. 103. 

Vinnikov KY, Robock A, Stouffer RJ, Walsh JE, Parkinson CL, Cavalieri DJ, 

Mitchell JFB, Garrett D, Zakharov VF (1999). Global warming and Northern 

Hemisphere sea ice extent. Science 286: 1934-1937. 

Visser IN (2005). First observations of feeding on Thresher (Alopias vulpinus) 

and Hammerhead (Sphyrna zygaena) Sharks by Killer Whales (Orcinus orca) 

specialising on elasmobranch prey. Aquatic Mammal 31: 83-88. 

Vopel K, Thistle D, Rosenberg R (2003). Effect of the brittle star Amphiura 

filiformis (Amphiuridae, Echinodermata) on oxygen flux into the sediment. 

Limnology and Oceanography 48: 2034-2045. 

Vorkamp K, Dam M, Riget F, Fauser P, Bossi R, Hansen AB (2007). Screening 

of "new" contaminants in the marine environment of Greenland and the 

Faroe Islands. National Environmental Reseach Institute (NERI), University 

of Aarhus Roskilde, Denmark. NERI Technical Report No. 525, 97 pp. 

Wardle CS, Carter TJ, Urquhart GG, Johnstone ADF, Ziolkowski AM, 

Hampson G, Mackie D (2001). Effects of seismic air guns on marine fish. 

Continental Shelf Research 21: 1005-1027. 

Wassmann P, Duarte CM, AgustÍ S, Sejr MK (2011). Footprints of climate 

change in the Arctic marine ecosystem. Global Change Biology 17: 1235- 

1249. 

Watkins WA, Tyack P, Moore KE (1987). The 20-Hz signals of finback 

whales (Balaenoptera physalus). Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 

82: 1901-1912.

Wegeberg S, Bangsholt J, Dolmer P, Hertz O, Mortensen AM, Pedersen PM 

(2005). Nordic Seaweed Project. Grønland. Resultat-status for 2004. 

Københavns Universitet. 22 pp. 

Weinrich M, Martin M, Griffiths R, Bove J, Schilling M (1997). A shift in 

distribution of humpback whales, Megaptera novaeangliae, in response to prey 

in the southern Gulf of Maine. Fishery Bulletin 95: 826-836. 

Werth AJ (2001). How do mysticetes remove prey trapped in baleen? 

Bulletin Museum of Comparative Zoology 156(1): 189-203. 

Węsławski JM, Kendall MA, Włodarska-Kowalczuk M, Iken K, Kędra M, 

Legezynska J, Sejr MK (2011). Climate change effects on Arctic fjord and 

coastal macrobenthic diversity—observations and predictions. Marine 

Biodiversity 41: 71-85. 

Whitehead H, Kevin C, Perkins J, Bryant P, Nichols G (1983). Population 

size, stock identity, and distribution of the humpback whales off West 

Greenland – summer 1981. Cambridge. Report of the International Whaling 

Commission No. 33, p. 497-501. 

Whitehead H, Wimmer T (2005). Heterogeneity and the mark–recapture 

assessment of the Scotian Shelf population of northern bottlenose whales 

(Hyperoodon ampullatus). Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 

62: 2573 - 2585. 

Wieland K, Hovgaard H (2002). Distribution of Atlantic cod (Gadus morhua) 

eggs and larvae in Greenland offshore waters. Journal of Northwater 

Atlantic Fishery Science 30: 60-76. 

Wieland K, Hovgaard H (2009). Cod versus shrimp dominance in West 

Greenland waters: Can climate change reverse the regime shift from a cod to 

a shrimp dominated ecosystem off West Greenland? ICES Council Meeting, 

ICES C.M. C:03: 1-24. 

Wiese FK, Montevecchi WA, Davoren GK, Huettmann F, Diamond AW, 

Linke J (2001). Seabirds at risk around offshore oil platforms in the Northwest 

Atlantic. Marine Pollution Bulletin 42: 1285-1290. 

Wiese FK, Robertson GJ, Gaston AJ (2004). Impacts of chronic marine oil 

pollution and the murre hunt in Newfoundland on thick-billed murre Uria 

lomvia populations in the eastern Canadian Arctic. Biological Conservation 

116: 205-216. 

Wiig Ø, Belikov SE, Boltunov AN, Garner GW (1996). Selection of Marine 

Mammal Valued Ecosystem Components and description of impact 

hypotheses in the Northern Sea Route Area. INSROP Working Paper No. 40, 

86 pp. 

Williams R, Gero S, Bejder L, Calambokidis J, Kraus SD, Lusseau D, Read AJ, 

Robbins J (2011). Underestimating the damage: interpreting cetacean carcass 

recoveries in the context of the Deepwater Horizon/BP incident. 

Conservation Letters 0: 1-6. 

279

280 

Wlodarska-Kowalczuk M, Kendall MA, Weslawski JM, Klages M, Soltwedel 

T (2004). Depth gradients of benthic standing stock and diversity on the 

continental margin at a high-latitude ice-free site (off Spitsbergen, 79 degrees 

N). Deep Sea Research Part I: Oceanographic Research Papers 51: 1903-1914. 

Wlodarska-Kowalczuk M, Pearson T (2004). Soft-bottom macrobenthic 

faunal associations and factors affecting species distribution in an glacial 

fjord (Kongsfjord, Spitsbergen). Polar Biology 27: 155-167. 

Wlodarska-Kowalczuk M, Pearson T, Kendall M (2005). Benthic response to 

chronic natural physical disturbance by glacial sedimentation in an Arctic 

fjord. Marine Ecology Progress Series 303: 31-41. 

Wulff A, Iken K., Quartino ML, Al-Handal A, Wiencke C, Clayton MN 

(2009). Biodiversity, biogeography and zonation of marine benthic micro- 

and macroalgae in the Arctic and Antactic. Botanica Marina 52: 491-507. 

Zachary TS, Andrew JW, Heather NK, Rosalind MR, Scott DK (2009). 

Metabolism of ingested lipids by North Atlantic right whales. Marine 

Ecology Progress Series 6: 259-271. 

Ziemer N, Kingsley MCS, Siegstad H (2010). Results of the Greeland bottom 

trawl survey for Northern shrimp (Pandalus borealis) off West Greenland 

(NAFO Sub area 1 and Division OA), 1988-2010. Northwest Atlantic 


Research Document No. 10/57, Serial No. N5848.

[Blank page]




The Bureau of Minerals and Petroleum (BMP) is planning 

for further exclusive licences for exploration and exploitation 

of hydrocarbons in the Greenland off shore areas of 

Davis Strait. To support the decision process BMP has asked 

DCE - Danish Centre for Environment and Energy and the 

Greenland Institute of Natural Resources (GINR) to prepare 

this preliminary Strategic Environmental Impact Assessment 

(SEIA) for the eastern Davis Strait between 62° and 67° N. 

Based on existing published and unpublished sources, 

including three previous assessment reports that were 

prepared in connection with the existing licence blocks, 

the SEIA describes the physical and biological environment 

including protected areas and threatened species, contaminent 

levels, and natural resource use. This description of 

the existing situation then forms the basis for assessment of 

the potential impacts of oil activities. 

If more licences are granted in the assessment area implementation 

of an environmental background study programme 

is planned to fi ll the data gaps that have been identifi ed 

and provide information required to support the environmental 

planning and regulation of the oil activities. The new 

information will be included in an updated SEIA, which will 

become the new reference document for the environmental 

work and substitute this preliminaryversion. 

ISBN: 978-87-92825-28-5 

ISSN: 2245-0203

The Davis Strait - DCE - Nationalt Center for Miljø og Energi

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?