VANCOUVER - Canada may be called onto the carpet this week as nations gather in the United Kingdom to negotiate the terms of an international treaty to regulate the controversial practice of geoengineering.

A First Nations salmon restoration group in Haida Gwaii has attracted worldwide attention after dumping more than 100 metric tonnes of iron into the Pacific Ocean in a process known as ocean fertilization.

Many scientists from around the world have condemned the unsanctioned experiment, and the federal government says it is investigating.

But Canada is a hotbed of geoengineering, says a watchdog group, and has been involved in similar experiments in the past.

Geoengineering is the deliberate modification of the environment as a means of combating climate change.

"Some countries would like to see geoengineering more acceptable than it has been, and Canada's in that bunch of countries," said Jim Thomas, spokesman for Montreal-based ETC Group, which opposes the practice.

Canada has pulled out of the Kyoto Protocol, which committed the country to reducing greenhouse gas emissions, and geoengineering is "potentially very attractive," Thomas said.

"You do have governments, and some large industries and some of the think tanks they sponsor who would prefer to see us go down the route of geoengineering. That if geoengineering could be touted as a cheap and quick and easy fix, that means we don't have to do all the heavy lifting of reducing emissions and changing our economy, then they would prefer that."

Canada funded and participated in two ocean fertilization experiments in 1999 and 2002 prior to signing onto a voluntary UN moratorium.

In July 2002, Fisheries Department scientists participated in a small-scale ocean project 1,500 kilometres off the coast of British Columbia called Subarctic Ecosystem Response to Iron Enrichment Study.

The iron causes a phytoplankton bloom, a natural sponge for carbon from the atmosphere. As organism feed off the plankton and die, sinking to the bottom of the ocean, the carbon is trapped down there. Previous, smaller-scale tests show the effect was short-term.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada's current research, though, is limited to computer simulations, spokesman Frank Stanek said in an email response to questions.

"Since that time, the department has not been involved in the deployment of iron solution into the ocean," Stanek wrote.

ETC Group, which works on issues of how new technologies can impact the world’s poor and vulnerable, lists eleven projects that have taken place or are in the works, including a hail suppression project in Alberta that continues today.

Funded by a consortium of insurance firms, the project seeds clouds over the Prairie province with silver iodide, to shrink ice stones.

Such geoengineering projects are controversial, but on the rise in the face of climate change.

In the incident off Haida Gwaii, the Haida Salmon Restoration Corp. of the village of Old Massett dumped iron into the ocean in late July. The effort was two-fold: to create a phytoplankton bloom that would one, spur salmon returns, and two, capture carbon for profit.

The iron causes a phytoplankton bloom, a natural sponge for carbon from the atmosphere. As organism feed off the plankton and die, sinking to the bottom of the ocean, the carbon is trapped down there. Previous, smaller-scale tests show the effect was short-term.

The negative reaction in the scientific world was swift.

There are several voluntary and mandatory international moratoria on ocean dumping and specifically on iron fertilization, and Environment Canada is investigating the experiment.

A regulatory regime to address exactly the kind of incident that took place off Haida Gwaii is up for negotiation at the meeting next week in London for the London Convention and Protocol, which bans dumping toxins at sea.

Adam Sweet, a spokesman for the Environment Department, said Canadian officials will be in London for the meeting on the London Convention from Oct. 29 to Nov. 2, and "in addition to the regular business at these meetings... parties will be discussing the issue of ocean fertilization."

The delegates will stress that no permission was granted for the experiment, and ocean fertilization is not allowed except for accredited scientific research.

"Minister Kent will direct his officials to inform conference delegates that over the past six years, Canada has strengthened its enforcement regime, and that Canada will use the full extent of our enforcement abilities to ensure that those who violate Canadian environmental law are caught, and charged," Sweet wrote.

The Old Massett experiment will be a hot topic, said Wendy Watson-Wright, assistant director general and executive secretary of the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission of UNESCO.

"It has concerns for Canada, concerns for the U.S., concerns for anybody on the Pacific but also, I think, for anybody on an ocean because it is one ocean," Watson-Wright said in an interview from Ottawa.

The experiment, which has been condemned by several Haida leaders, was much larger than any previous experiment, she pointed out.

"There are just so many questions that we see this as a very dangerous precedent."

Now the important thing is to monitor the fallout, she said.

"But monitoring of what and where? That's what needs to be decided and it does require the international scientific community to be inputting into those decisions."

Also on HuffPost:

Loading Slideshow...
  • Overfishing

    Many marine scientists <a href="http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_overfishing" target="_hplink">consider</a> overfishing to be the worst impact humans are having on the oceans. The Food and Agriculture Organization <a href="http://www.un.org/events/tenstories/06/story.asp?storyID=800" target="_hplink">estimates</a> that over 70% of the world’s fish species have been entirely exploited or depleted. By capturing fish faster than they can reproduce, we are harming entire ecosystems that interact with those species, from the food they eat to the predators that eat them. These losses make the ecosystems more <a href="http://explorations.ucsd.edu/biodiversity/" target="_hplink">vulnerable</a> to other disturbances, such as pollution. A complete overhaul of fishing policies, requiring global cooperation, is needed to achieve a sustainable system.

  • Irresponsible Fish Farming

    Fish farming, or aquaculture, is the growing response to wild fish stocks rapidly depleting. While it sounds like a good idea in theory, it unfortunately has many negative consequences due to poorly managed operations. Nutrient and chemical pollution can occur easily in open-ocean operations when fish feed, excrement, and medication is released into the environment. Farmed fish accidentally released into wild populations can also have <a href="http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/14894/en" target="_hplink">destructive effects</a>, such as loss of native stocks, disease transmission, and damaging changes in habitat. Unfortunately, the biggest hindrance to overcoming the challenges of an industry that supplies nearly <a href="http://www.greenfacts.org/en/fisheries/l-2/01-fisheries-production.htm#5" target="_hplink">50%</a> of the world’s fish food supply is that it currently remains relatively <a href="http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_aquaculture" target="_hplink">unregulated</a>.

  • Ghost Fishing

    Ghost fishing is an environmentally harmful issue caused when lost or discarded fishing gear continues to catch fish and other marine life. Often times, the traps trigger a chain-reaction problem when larger predators come to eat the smaller ones that have been ensnared, only to get tangled in the mess themselves. The issue of ghost fishing is <a href="http://www.fao.org/fishery/topic/14798/en" target="_hplink">most common</a> with passive gear that has been abandoned, and also poses a serious threat to other ocean vessels. Stray gear can be caught in the propeller of a boat, damaging or even disabling it. Many solutions have been offered, such as fishing gear made from biodegradable materials or incentives like the Republic of Korea’s <a href="http://marinedebris.noaa.gov/projects/koreajpa.html" target="_hplink">buy-back program</a>, which rewards fisherman for turning in old gear.

  • Garbage

    This one is the most obvious. It’s astounding how much of our trash finds its way into the ocean. Animals become easily entangled and trapped in our garbage, and it can destroy delicate sea life like coral and sponges. In addition, sea turtles and dolphins often mistake plastic bags for their favorite foods, jellyfish and squids, <a href="http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/PageServer?pagename=issues_debris" target="_hplink">choking them</a> or clogging their digestive system. If that’s not bad enough, hopefully the <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2009/07/090731-ocean-trash-pacific.html" target="_hplink">bigger-than-Texas trash vortex</a> in the Pacific Ocean and its <a href="http://news.nationalgeographic.com/news/2010/03/100302-new-ocean-trash-garbage-patch/" target="_hplink">smaller cousin</a> in the Atlantic will help serve as a wakeup call.

  • Acidification

    The ocean absorbs as much as <a href="http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/05/080521105251.htm" target="_hplink">one third</a> of the CO2 emitted worldwide, which keeps us cooler but makes the ocean surface much more acidic. This has the effect of limiting calcium carbonate needed by coral, plankton, and other marine life that <a href="http://www.oceanconservancy.org/site/News2?news_iv_ctrl=-1&abbr=press_&page=NewsArticle&id=10341#OceanAcidifying" target="_hplink">use it</a> to build the skeletal frames and shells that protect them. Oceanic acidity has increased by <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ocean_acidification" target="_hplink">25%</a> since the industrial revolution, and will eventually destroy much marine life if it increases at this rate.

  • Dead Zones

    Dead zones are areas where the sea floor has little to no dissolved oxygen. These areas are often found at the mouths of large rivers, and are caused <a href="http://disc.sci.gsfc.nasa.gov/oceancolor/additional/science-focus/ocean-color/dead_zones.shtml" target="_hplink">primarily</a> by fertilizers that are being carried in the runoff. Unfortunately, the lack of oxygen kills many creatures and destroys entire habitats. At our current rate, dead zones will increase by <a href="http://www.nature.com/news/2008/081114/full/news.2008.1230.html" target="_hplink">50%</a> before the end of the century.

  • Mercury Pollution

    Scientists <a href="http://www.environmentalhealthnews.org/ehs/news/ocean-mercury-increasing" target="_hplink">report</a> that our ocean’s mercury levels have risen over 30% the last 20 years, and will increase another 50% in the next few decades. Emissions from coal power plants are the <a href="http://www.nescaum.org/documents/rpt031104mercury.pdf/" target="_hplink">primary culprit</a>, dispensing poisonous mercury that works its way up the food chain, eventually coming to us through the fish we eat. This <a href="http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=9899" target="_hplink">neurotoxin</a> can alter brain development of fetuses and has been linked with learning problems.

  • Offshore Drilling

    Offshore drilling continues to be a debate, but it’s clear that proceeding with oil production will only exacerbate the dilemmas of our oceans. The use of fossil fuels is the reason our oceans have been heating up and becoming more acidic, but offshore drilling takes the risks even further. When oil is extracted from the ocean floor, other chemicals like mercury, arsenic, and lead <a href="http://science.howstuffworks.com/offshore-drilling-controversy2.htm" target="_hplink">come up with it</a>. Also, the seismic waves used to find oil harm aquatic mammals and disorient whales. In 2008, <a href="http://www.livescience.com/environment/080625-oil-drilling.html" target="_hplink">100 whales</a> had beached themselves as a result of ExxonMobil exploring for oil with these techniques. Furthermore, the infrastructure projects to transport the oil often create <a href="http://www.treehugger.com/files/2009/02/offshore-drilling-oil-false-hope.php" target="_hplink">worse problems</a>, eroding the coastline. These realities are another reason

  • Shark Finning / Whaling

    The destruction of the ocean’s most important predators has significant consequences that ripple down the food chain. 50 to 100 million sharks are killed <a href="http://www.hsus.org/hsi/oceans/sharks/shark_finning/" target="_hplink">each year</a>, either as bycatch from fishing vessels or directly hunted for their dorsal fins, used in an expensive soup popular across Asia. When finned, the sharks are thrown back into the water, often still alive and left to bleed to death. Unfortunately, sharks reproduce fairly <a href="http://www.treehugger.com/files/2007/01/jeanmichel_cous.php" target="_hplink">slowly</a> and don’t have a large amount of offspring, so these actions have long-lasting effects on the delicate ecosystems they help <a href="http://www.hsus.org/hsi/oceans/sharks/shark_finning/shark_finning_faq.html" target="_hplink">regulate</a>. Despite the 1986 moratorium on many types of whaling, it still continues to be a problem, with some nations like Japan looking for loopholes and lobbying for lax regulations.