July 1, 2025 • 56 mins
In this episode we continue our journey with oiled wildlife preparedness and response. In particular we look at the important role of Sea Alarm, a non-governmental organization founded 25 years ago to advance wildlife response preparedness. In 2005, OSRL and Sea Alarm joined forces to address the critical gaps in oiled wildlife response preparedness, particularly in relation to industry preparedness. Back then, major oil spills like Erika, Prestige, and Tricolor exposed much of the world’s lack of readiness to protect wildlife. Governments were often overwhelmed, and NGOs had to self-organize without adequate resources. Over the last 20 years the collaboration between OSRL and Sea Alarm has transformed the landscape, making wildlife response preparedness more of a priority for governments and industry alike.
To explore this, we speak with Sea Alarm’s General Manager, Hugo Nijkamp. Hugo has been at the helm of Sea Alarm since its inception. We reflect on the achievements and transformations of the past 20 years - from developing international networks and enhancing local capabilities to mapping global preparedness. We also celebrate the partnership between Sea Alarm and OSRL and look ahead to the future and explore how we can adapt to new risks to wildlife, further improve global response capabilities, and continue to foster international collaboration.
Please give us ★★★★★, leave a review, and tell your friends about us as each share and like makes a difference.
Mark as Played
Transcript
Episode Transcript
Available transcripts are automatically generated. Complete accuracy is not guaranteed.
Paul Kelway (00:02):
Hello and welcome to the Response Force Multiplier
, a podcast that exploresemergency planning and response.
On the Response ForceMultiplier, we bring together
compelling experts and thoughtleaders to provide a fresh take
on key issues and cutting edgetechniques.
In each episode, we'll diveinto one aspect of emergency
(00:23):
planning and response and we'lluse OSRL's unique pool of
experts and collaborators togain new insights and to distill
these down into actionabletools and techniques for better
preparedness and response tocrisis incidents and emergencies
.
My name is Paul Kelway, we areOSRL and this is the Response
Force Multiplier.
We are OSRL and this is theResponse Force Multiplier.
Hugo Nijkamp (00:46):
So you've been the general manager of Sea Alarm
since it first started, obviouspoint to start with here is just
to ask you just to brieflyintroduce Sea Alarm in terms of
the organization and its mission.
Yeah well, Sea Alarm is a teamof four, based in Belgium, in
Brussels, but we've got a globalremit and very much also a
regional, european remit.
(01:06):
We specialize in oil andwildlife response and
preparedness and we want to bevery good at it and we want to
act as an impartial, independentactor and we place ourselves in
the middle of NGOs, industryand government, because in an
oil spill with wildlife, youneed all those three spheres,
(01:28):
and so we want to make sure thatall these actors in those
spheres can actually worktogether.
And in order to facilitate that, you have to be independent and
impartial yourself, you have toknow what you're talking about
and you must become some kind ofa trusted agent to all these
parties, and that has been ourmission.
Well, the mission has been tomake the world more prepared,
(01:52):
but our positioning and the waythat we try to internalize the
methodology is actually the keyto what we could achieve in that
way, you talk about thosedifferent stakeholder parties
that are really key, and OSRLand Sea Alarm are two
stakeholders within that sphere.
Paul Kelway (02:10):
The reason we're talking today, of course, is
that we're celebrating 20 yearsof the two organizations working
together.
So that takes us all the wayback to 2005, when that
relationship first started.
And I wanted to ask you because, if you look back the few years
before that, there was thisseries of remarkable events in
incidents, largely in europe,but with spills like the erica,
(02:32):
the treasure in south africa,but then also the prestige in
spain and the tricolor inbelgium.
So I wanted to ask you a littlebit about what was the state of
world wildlife preparedness inthose years and what gaps did
that expose, and what was seaalarms role in that time yeah, I
mean those were the days of thebig incidents, I would say, and
(02:53):
for sea alarm, as a startingorganization in this field, it
was a big baptizing.
Hugo Nijkamp (03:00):
But the preparedness in those days were
very low.
So the spills that you'rementioning happened in countries
that were not prepared.
Preparedness also is inrelation to the size of the
incident and these spills havebecome so famous because it had
such an overwhelming impact onwildlife coming ashore.
And with hindsight you know,with the knowledge of now, we
(03:22):
can also conclude that it's veryhard to be prepared if you get
overwhelmed in such numbers.
In those days governments didnot know what to do.
They got overwhelmed as welland also get paralyzed, almost
if you want.
And then you always getcitizens or NGOs that are
stepping into that vacuum andstart to rescue whatever they
(03:44):
can do or however it's presentedto them, and they self-organize
.
And what we also saw in thosedays were that there were a
number of organizationsinternationally that would also
self-mobilize into the area alsoto assist and also do what they
can, and that, I think, was thepicture over those years.
(04:05):
The reason that Sea Alarmactually was there was because
Sea Alarm was created in orderto facilitate that situation
where everybody would work onislands, not being connected
with governments, governmentsnot knowing what to do, etc.
So we actually came in not somuch self-mobilized, so we
actually were very much closelyworking with at that time, ITOPF
(04:30):
, and also with P&I Clubs andthe IOPC Funds, so Prestige, for
instance, they asked us tomobilize into the country on
their behalf and just to try tosee what is happening.
Can we do anything to actuallymake those connections?
And that's what we did.
And so I must say that also inour role in those incidents, in
(04:52):
the fact that it wasoverwhelming and all parties
doing their best, it gave us somuch lessons to learn, having
seen this and also from aperspective like what are the
gaps and how can we fill thosegaps.
We also were identified, I think, by ITOPF as an organization
(05:12):
that could fill also gaps forthem that would take care of
wildlife not being seen by theincident command and later on
having lots of costs that theywanted to get compensated for
but nobody knew what they haddone, so they could not be
compensated for that reason.
(05:33):
So italk actually identified inwhat we were aiming to do as
like, okay, let's give this achance, because if this could be
solved by learning from thoselessons, creating networks,
let's say, of more experiencedorganizations that can actually
be used to build a morestructured and more organized
(05:55):
wildlife response.
That is worth to try.
And so ITOPF basically gave usa lot of coaching and support,
also to introduce us into theindustry realm of shipping, P&I
clubs all of that including OSRLobviously and also coached us
to understand how these systemswork, which we could then also
project and translate towardsthe role of governments and the
(06:19):
role of NGOs, and so very muchin those early years ITOPF was
really instrumental also for usto develop into this impartial
and independent role.
Paul Kelway (06:32):
That's probably a good segue to my next question,
which is you mentioned OSRL.
So what were the circumstancesaround OSRL and Sea Alarm coming
together more formally then atthe beginning?
What were the aims initially ofthat collaboration?
Hugo Nijkamp (06:49):
Well, it was also again with the assistance of
ITOPF, introducing us also to,for instance, Ipieca's oil spill
working group and also madesure that I would make some
presentations there to get thatgroup interested.
And out of that group therewere a few individuals and also
ITOPF championing this.
So you always need that fewpeople that have visionary
(07:12):
picture of where it should goand also to see like, okay, this
needs some support.
And there were champions alsoin some of the companies that
also said, okay, we need to dothis, we need to develop this.
Companies that also said, okay,we need to do this, we need to
develop this.
And it actually started thatSea Alarm was invited to lead a
project to actually develop adocument that would indicate
what is needed.
(07:32):
You know how do you plan andhow do you prepare for wildlife.
That project actually resultedin the famous volume 13 in the
report series of Aikika.
So we were leading that project.
But obviously we actuallyorganized the whole working
group around it.
So we knew key people that wereinternationally the lead
experts in wildlife response,all kinds of individuals from
(07:56):
the industry.
Itop was on board.
So we actually created amulti-sectoral working group to
actually look into like, how dowe actually nail this.
And that resulted in thatdocument.
And when the document waspublished by IPIECA, they also
thought, yeah, okay, now we'vegot the document, but who's
going to work on it?
And that created somethingwhere they said, okay, you know,
(08:18):
the mission of Sea Alarm isgood.
They've also combined andlinked different groups together
.
Apparently they can do that.
And Sea Alarm was not wellfunded at that moment, you know,
and it was just me and a fewpeople that did it at that
moment, most of the time almostfreelance and very limited.
(08:38):
And I also said to the industry,like, if you want to continue
this, then yeah, you know, wehave to solve that, because
otherwise I cannot simply do it.
And so they.
So they said, okay, then weactually organize something that
you should maybe work with oilspill response limited to
actually create that basis bywhich we can actually make this
happen.
So they actually facilitatedthat and in the early years I
(09:02):
remember that also well was abit surprised because they did
not do anything.
Wildlife, that was not theirthing.
And it was also very much likeokay, a bit uneasy, you know, to
be honest, and in the beginning, like what should we do?
How do we do it?
And it was also where we formeda steering group, where I asked
if ITOPF would also be therejust to facilitate that process,
(09:24):
that we had to work togetherand also on a mission that was
totally new, you know, foreverybody, also for the industry
at large, because also thecompanies you know they were
quite live.
so you had these few championsin the industry that were also
leading, influential indiscussions in those forums that
(09:46):
industry had, like the oilspill working group, and that
made it happen.
So it was really a journeywhere nobody would exactly know
where it would go to and we justkicked it off and do the best
we could.
Paul Kelway (10:02):
When you mention the uncertainty or just how to
introduce and integrate this newtopic.
So it points to this to somedegree.
But what was the relationshipto wildlife response from the
oil industry at the time?
Obviously, you know certaincountries at that time maybe was
more accepted than others, butin general, what was the
(10:22):
experience at that time, havingto engage in these conversations
about taking it more seriouslyor integrating it more fully?
Hugo Nijkamp (10:29):
yeah, I would say the industry did not have oil
wildlife response as a targetbecause and it's totally
understandable, because ithappens or it doesn't happen and
at that time industry was somuch in that time frame still,
you know working out their owngood practices on how to respond
to oil spills in general, andso the focus of those activities
(10:54):
were going into broader oilspill management.
So experiences with bigincidents where the oil industry
actually was confronted withhuge wildlife impact were very
limited too.
There were a few officers inoil companies that had managed
some of these wildlife incidentsand they were actually amongst
(11:15):
those champions that wanted toreach out to also their
colleagues, like, yeah, you know, this is something that is
important, but themisunderstanding, I think, and
also the underestimation thateverybody has was like, yeah,
you know, this is something thatis important, but the
misunderstanding, I think, andalso the underestimation that
everybody has was like, yeah,you know, wildlife, that is a
few ducks that actually arriveon the shore and what's the big
deal here?
You know, there are always NGOsthat pick them up and they wash
(11:37):
them and they release them and,yeah, why should we prepare for
that?
Prepare for that?
And so the description of whata wildlife response is and the
gradual increase in complexitythat is generated by the number
of animals washing ashore.
That was unknown, not realized.
So that has been the effort SeaAlarm, but also many other
(12:00):
organizations, try toincreasingly describe and
present so that it becamesomething also at that level of
a science to be respected by thepeople in those positions that
would actually direct funds hereand there, and I remember that
was a long, long journey, andnot only with the industry but
(12:21):
also with OSRL.
We actually said we need tomake the world more prepared.
It's not only the industry.
We need to work withgovernments, we need to create
governmental language so thatgovernments support it.
And it comes back to that, thethree domains that we need to
look at.
And, to be perfectly fair, wealso had to work with the NGOs,
(12:44):
even the experts, to also havethat education.
How do we all do it?
Do we all do it the same?
Are there standards?
What are those standards?
If we work with industry, howwould we do that?
What is our experience?
Where are the gaps?
Because everybody knew that ifwe go out, there is no kind of
gaps and by which you are moreor less standing alone.
(13:05):
Whatever you can do.
Yeah, you grab an animal, youstart rehabilitating them
according to good practice,that's what you do, but does
that make any difference on thebigger scale of things?
That was the essence, and I Ioversee, let's say, the 25 years
of this work and I can say thatthat was the most
(13:26):
mission-driven activities, with,in the beginning, very slow
resonance that you create, butgradually you get people more
interested.
And it was also to actuallypresent those incidents that we
were talking about, becausethose were the incidents that
you could actually demonstrate.
But you had to tell it in acertain way so that it would
(13:48):
resonate in the language thatpeople would understand.
And that has been a journeyalso for ourselves, like you
know.
First of all you think, oh, youknow, it's a clear issue, we
just present it and they willsee it.
But they don't, because theydon't recognize what they want
to see.
And you always have an audiencethat feel it irrelevant, like,
(14:08):
oh, the next session is aboutwhite life.
Okay, you know, then I'm goingto work a bit on my computer
long journey.
But I think we have insisted tocontinue that, and gradually
also as well.
You know, rob ho Holland is,for instance, one of these
persons that from the beginningwas really interested, also
personally, to get this goingand he did a lot of mission work
(14:32):
to also internally OSRL in thefirst place.
So there are some people herelike Rob Holland that did so
much.
So, looking back, just a numberof people that we tried to link
together and actually make surethat you have some kind of a
critical mass of visionarypeople that have also some
influence.
And that has been, I think, athread line over those years
(14:57):
continuously grabbing the peoplethat you see, oh, you know that
is a person that is influentialand understands it, and we
always, also in Sea Alarm, tryto bind those people to that
mission and even we had alwaysthat kind of people also on our
board to make sure that theytotally understand the whole
picture and the mission initself and become missionaries.
Paul Kelway (15:19):
Well, let's talk about over 20 years.
Just some of the achievementsof that work together.
You mentioned Rob Holland, mycolleague here at OSRL.
Over 20 years, just some of theachievements of that work
together.
You mentioned rob holland, mycolleague here at osrl.
So the relationship betweenosrl and clm has enabled a
number of preparednessdeliverables over the years.
So one of those has been theservice to osrl's members of
guaranteed access to clm'stechnical advice.
(15:39):
So I did want to just ask youwhat is that service and why is
that important to OSRL's members?
Hugo Nijkamp (15:46):
Yeah, that was from the beginning.
When Sea Alarm and OSRL startedworking together, it was
obviously that it was to servethe industry in incidents.
So if Sea Alarm then was theactor to actually advise and to
(16:07):
have that growing knowledgeabout how it would work and how
this would become effective,then we would also be a good
advisor that could be activatedif industry ran into a problem.
From the beginning that was oneof the services that OSRL and
Sea Alarm defined Okay, we aregoing to collaborate.
So OSRL would say, if one ofour members gets into a wildlife
incident, then yeah, we alsoneed to act.
This was a big issue for us tostep into because that was 24-7.
(16:30):
But it also motivated the factthat Sea Alarm also should be on
the phone all the time.
So that also motivated thefunding scheme on which the
collaboration was faced.
The 24-7 advisory that has nowbeen existing 20 years, and not
only in real-time incident butalso in exercises, and I think
(16:54):
through exercises that role alsocould be visualized, where you
also can demonstrate what youbring to the table.
So I think that has beenessential.
It also has actually given us atask from the beginning like oh
my God, and really that hascreated a lot of awareness with
us, like we are in that role.
(17:15):
We were the only, literally theonly advisor that industry would
activate globally.
But then you look at the worldand the diversity of the world,
not only in countries, but alsoin biodiversity.
So you have tropicalenvironments, we've got polar
environments and then anythingin between.
Then you suddenly realize like,oh, my god, you know what are
(17:36):
the wildlife response profiles,you know.
So you say well, okay, that isimportant, there needs to be
some advice.
But at the same time youimportant, there needs to be
some advice, but at the sametime you think like this needs
to be developed.
You know we need to haveconcepts.
So it has driven in ourorganization, but also trying to
(17:59):
make everybody around us aware,like, guys, you know, if this
is going on and you would bemobilized also as an expert,
what are you going to do?
Is it in your comfort zone oroutside of your comfort zone?
And, to be perfectly honest,where we are now, today, we've
achieved a lot, but there'sstill so much where our
mobilization will be out of ourcomfort zone and that really
(18:20):
needs to be addressed and we areaddressing that.
You know it is important.
Paul Kelway (18:27):
You specifically mentioned understanding the
profiles of certain countries,and so another tool that was
developed by Sea Alarm, again aspart of the work with OSRL is
indeed a database of thoseprofiles.
You have actively developed amore coherent picture or
understanding of if that countryhas preparedness systems.
So could you just introducethat as a tool and also perhaps
(18:51):
say, having looked at that andhaving almost developed more of
a complete picture, what doesthat tell us?
You were alluding to it alreadyin terms of being out of our
comfort zone, but what does thattell us about the state of
preparedness globally?
Hugo Nijkamp (19:03):
This was actually a project that started in those
early days.
We didn't have that contractwith Australia, but one of the
champions were people in BP andthey were saying we are
perfectly interested, you know,in what you're doing, but, yes,
maybe we can already get yougoing by funding you, by giving
us some profiles about howprepared our countries and they
(19:26):
knew that we were European based.
So they said, well, you know,start with Europe.
And while we actually startedto create those profiles, which
was basically like what is thelevel of preparedness of
different countries andgovernmental systems?
Also the kind of wildlifescenarios that you could expect
Not so much the scenarios infull extent, but just what kind
(19:46):
of animals can you expect and sowe started that for a few
countries.
And while we were doing that,then we actually were linked to
OSRL and then OSRL and Sea Alarmsaid, okay, you know, this
could be really a goodinvestment to include in the
project.
We also were very muchadvocating that because, yeah,
you need to know who's whom.
(20:07):
Also, in this bill, it would bevery good to pre-identify which
ministries, which governmentalagencies would be the leading
parties.
And the idea was also, if weactually did develop a profile,
you need to contact thecountries and, who knows, is
there some resonance Like, oh,we are not prepared.
And there are some countries,like Brazil, that was not aware
(20:30):
of where they would go withwildlife response and they
certainly by our interview,certainly realized we don't have
it and we've got a lot ofactivities out there and now
Brazil is one of the mostprepared countries.
It is not because of ourcountry profile, but I remember
that the governmental agencyrealized that this was a gap and
to their colleagues, we need todo something.
(20:51):
And they were actuallydemanding like, okay, the
industry should have a plan inplace.
That was coming out of thatprocess.
Our role was very minimal butit lights a spark.
So over the years we haveprogressively done most of the
coastal countries on the world.
So all these profiles, theyhave different dimensions.
(21:12):
What are the species?
What are the governments?
What can we expect if somethinghappens?
Has there been wildlifeincidents in the past or big
incidents, that kind of stuff?
We have now over a hundredcountries, so really impressive.
And that also requires that atsome point you need to start
maintaining it, because it'sobviously always a snapshot in
(21:34):
time.
So we are very much maintainingit.
Sometimes there's a new one.
Sometimes we are investing intoupdating it.
But if you look at the world mapwith countries that we managed
to do, we know more or less howprepared the world is.
It's a good overview.
And then you start to look atokay, you know, can we actually
do some kind of a classificationwhere you can see like, okay,
(21:57):
there's a graduation, maybe anexperience, maybe they had
experience and there might besome leftovers in terms of
organizations that are stillinterested in training
themselves to the highest level,which is countries that have a
plan in place and not having aplan in place but also an
implementation plan, so thatit's not a plan on the shelf but
(22:18):
also a implementation programlinked to it that actually keeps
the resources in a good shape,program linked to it that
actually keeps the resources ina good shape.
No-transcript.
Fantastic.
If it's a big country, thenimmediately you know you get a
big green spot on the map, so itlooks really impressive.
But there's also smallercountries that do it and that
(22:39):
you cannot see the difference.
But there's certainly there.
But it always highlights theabsolute majority of countries
that are very little or notprepared, and that is often also
in areas where there's industryactivities, and that raises the
question okay, there are risks,and obviously it doesn't happen
(23:02):
that often, but you need tocreate awareness around that.
Paul Kelway (23:06):
Well, we should say that that database is a freely
available resource through SeaAlarm.
It's something thatstakeholders can access and look
at that information.
Hugo Nijkamp (23:16):
I would say the database is not public.
We have a huge database inwhich you also keep the
organizations and also theexpertise.
We cannot publish that, butwhat we publish is the narrative
.
So we are describing whatpreparedness levels are.
The aim in the very beginning,in the dialogue with BP, we both
realized that doing thatinvestigation also creates
(23:38):
intelligence, if you want, aboutwho's whom in those countries.
So if we then are mobilized asan advisor by the industry, we
also have that materialimmediately available.
So if it's as up-to as we cankeep it, it gives us this
critical advantage of not havingto do lots of phone calls or
(24:00):
whatever.
We immediately can actuallycontact people in country to see
what's happening and it createsthat advantage of maybe a few
days where you have a good entryof information.
Paul Kelway (24:13):
Yeah, that's the great added value of building
that picture and, as you say, Imean Sea Alarm.
There's that technical advisoryrole, which is essentially just
because the world is notprepared and it's at least being
able to tap into that advice,building that picture, but also
then hopefully working withstakeholders to move the needle
and see more of those countriesbeing proactive and moving
things forward.
And part of that in terms ofSea Alarm's role has been trying
(24:36):
to create more structuralrelationships between these key
stakeholders, between Oil Spillresponse organizations,
government and industry.
And I guess the question onthat is what's been the focus of
that work and what has been theachievements around that over
the last 20 years?
Hugo Nijkamp (24:52):
Well, there were many achievements and I would
say also the contract and therelationship with OSRL in the
background has been a very firmbasis under what we've done,
just for the fact that to havethat stability also allows us to
have all kinds of activitiesdeveloping in that realm.
So one of the things that Iwould like to highlight is also
(25:16):
our work in Europe.
Obviously, this is our backyardand if you look at it globally,
europe has lots ofcollaboration between
authorities, between countriesfor oil spill response
management and globally you'vegot conventions that all coastal
countries have signed.
You know that you have to worktogether, but in Europe I think
(25:36):
it's one of the regions wherethere's a lot of collaboration
and that originally was verymuch on regional seas like the
Baltic Sea.
You've got HELCOM, then you'vegot the North Sea, atlantic is
Bonn Agreement and in theMediterranean you've got the
Barcelona Agreement and then youalmost have covered all the
coastal waters, not only coastalbut also offshore waters where
(25:58):
spill can happen.
And you've got the EuropeanCommission and the European
Commission being part of allthese agreements, but also the
party that can come with a lotof funding to do projects.
That was not accessible when wewere starting because we were
too small and we could not makeproposals.
But the moment that we actually, through the contract with OSRL
(26:20):
, had, let's say, substance andwe had people really on the
payroll, that was qualifying usas a party that could develop
proposals and where you have topartner, so we did not waste the
opportunity.
And where you have to partner,so we did not waste the
opportunity.
In one of the first years, Imean, we had three of those
projects proposed and financedOne we were leading ourselves
(26:42):
and the others we werepartnering.
But they were all aboutwildlife response.
One was a scientific projectwhat is the impact on animal
populations?
How do we measure it?
To develop a guideline.
One was to actually train andfind wildlife responders that
were knowing each other.
But through that project weactually started developing,
working together, also lookingat guidelines.
(27:03):
And there was a third we wereleading ourselves and OSRL was
also partnering in that onewhere we actually created a
European wildlife document thatwas actually advocating that
governments should plan for itand how they do it.
And that was the start of, overthe years, numerous European
(27:23):
projects that we could actuallydevelop that were all directed
towards making sure thatgovernments, increasingly, would
take this seriously and havedocuments, plans and also
systems in place for mutualassistance, for instance.
And meanwhile, through thatproject we could actually build
our European network, eroa.
That were organizations thatknew each other from these
(27:46):
spills and knew that we were allaiming at good practices, and
those projects actually allowedus to set up EUROWA, not only as
a network, but also a wholephilosophy of making experts
more prepared, working with thegovernment agencies to train,
and that has created a hugespinoff that all these regional
agreements have adopted.
(28:07):
So all the regional agreementshave plans for mutual assistance
and dealing with wildliferesponse.
Increasing number of countriesare actually venturing into
planning, so Europe in thatsense, has a lot of governmental
standards that could also beshared internationally, like how
do you do that, what are thoseplans?
(28:28):
And so there's a lot of valuecreated there that also would
benefit not only responsesinternationally but also
preparedness processesinternationally.
It's a question of advocatingthis and having all that
material in your hand.
So it's huge and yeah, I wouldsay that that was unthinkable in
(28:48):
the early days that we get thatfar, but it has boosted a lot
of preparedness and thinking,preparedness and recognition.
Paul Kelway (28:58):
Yeah, incredible progress.
So that speaks to Europe and,as you mentioned, there were
some elements of that in termsof some of those projects that
there was some Sea Alarmcollaborated on.
The other one, of course, wherethere was strong collaboration
was on that more globalintegration piece, more directed
at the industry, which hasended up culminating in what's
now a service through GOWRS.
Can you talk also just aboutwhat was the alarm's role in
(29:19):
that conversation and trying tomove the needle on that
integration?
Hugo Nijkamp (29:23):
yeah, there were various reasons why that should
be developed.
One was obviously that for allthese years, we felt very alone
in that 24 on 7, because wewould be an advisor, but what
you would need eventually ispeople that can actually respond
, and meanwhile, we wereactually trying to bind those
organizations also inviting theminto meetings or workshops that
(29:47):
we would fund out of theproject, where those
organizations would cometogether, discuss these things,
but they didn't have any formalrelationship with the industry
at large and that was, I felt,always not a good situation.
They should somehow be part ofthis system.
The Macondo incident in 2010was one of these big incidents
(30:08):
that was a global game changer,also for the industry, and that
did a few things.
Game changer also for theindustry and that did a few
things.
One of the things was itgenerated a lot of interest into
wildlife response and at thatpoint, I think OSRL, Sea Alarm
were very much in a place thatwe had a good language for that
to stimulate that, and Iremember at that moment, lots of
(30:31):
projects was reining in intoSea Alarm Many companies wanting
to explore or having a plan inplace for wildlife, and it was
overwhelmingly much, and what wedid is actually taking that as
a mechanism to involve theseorganizations that we thought
would be important to get onboard so that we could work
(30:51):
together.
We could actually also exchangeideas and the philosophy of
what is a good plan, what isgood preparedness.
So that was one of the processes.
The other process was thatorganizations were still working
on islands and so we usedinternational meetings like the
IOSC et cetera, where theseorganizations would come to, but
also effects of oil on wildlifeconferences to start talking.
(31:14):
And so after the Macondo weactually thought we have now
funds because also theconsultancies gave income and
also some budget for us toactually travel to those
organizations.
So we visited them where theywere having private
conversations, like, okay, youknow, how do you see this, what
would be your blockages thatmight occur, why would you not
(31:37):
do it and can we take that away?
And also that pre-work wasactually to assess if everybody
was willing and would considerthat collaboration.
We also put them together inone room in several occasions
where we get everybody aroundthe table and try to speak about
it.
So that was a process going onto a moment in an EOW in New
(31:57):
Orleans where I thought you know, do you want it or not.
You know, I want to see it.
And that was reallyconfirmation like, yes, we would
like to do that.
And then Rob Holland was thereas well, and I remember Rob and
I sitting on the terrace like,yeah, now we have to materialize
this.
You know that they are ready todo it, but now we need to
actually have industry gettinginto a process that it can be
(32:17):
developed, and that led to theidea to have an Interspill lunch
meeting the famous lunchmeeting in 2012, where we had
champions in the room and allinternational organizations that
mattered, and then we actuallypresented this is your problem,
(32:41):
but also this is your solution.
You know you can now access theworld's finest experts on a
mission that we are creatingthat service for you, and we
called it immediately likethat's a global wildlife
response system, and thatmeeting actually led to an
invitation from the industrysaying, okay, great, write us a
plan.
And then we created a workforcewith different organizations to
develop that plan, and also weinvited different industry
(33:04):
organizations.
I thought to also be part of itso that it would be a good
structure, and so we had then aplan and I, with Rob, all of
that we called it dragon's den,where we had to sell that
proposal to industry highestlevels investors.
That took years.
The idea was good, but thetiming of funding were all kind
(33:25):
of things that had all thepriorities, so it took a few
years where we had to rewriteproposal, put it in, pitch it
again.
Know, there was a lot of thingsthat Rob and I did, but
eventually in 2015, it was done.
Okay, Ipieca actually had moneypost-Macondo that they wanted
to spend on that.
So the project started under anIPIECA contract and then we
(33:47):
contracted the 10 organizationsthat were willing to collaborate
.
And that was a journey as wellto see how are we going to do
this, what would be the standardoperational procedure?
What is the good practice.
So those two things were, inthose early days, the key.
And then that's a difficultprocess at the same time because
you have to do itinternationally, so you have to
(34:09):
come together, you have to do itduring a week where everybody
can attend, and then you've gotthe workforce and then between
that, yeah, there's a bit ofwork, everybody busy, so it's a
process that actually took moreyears than we anticipated.
But industry understood that andactually OSRL then stepped in
to say, okay, with our members,we will actually continue
(34:31):
funding of it.
So the contracts switched toOSRL, still to Sea Alarm,
because we had all thatsubcontracts already in place,
and so we did that in a fewextensions until we came to a
point and that was also a thirdline in the development where we
actually encouraged those 10organizations to be
(34:51):
self-governed.
So from the beginning weactually did that to make sure
that they had language and alsosome documents that would
actually bind them together likea self organizing system and in
the end also to make sure thatthey could exist outside of Sea
Alarm in the first place, sothat we were actually
facilitating that throughcontracts and the whole
(35:12):
financial management ofeverything that we did.
But that also needed to be moreindependent and that led to the
decision of GOWRS to actuallyset up their own entity and
eventually they would actuallyprovide that service, which is
the assessment team service thatrecently now has been signed,
(35:33):
which is over those years.
It took a long time, but for theright reasons, because it is
complex.
You know that 10 organizationsglobally with different cultures
, different experiences,different systems.
They need to do it together,which is a fantastic thing, and
obviously we facilitated thatand also providing that support.
But eventually that group hasorganized themselves quite well
(35:57):
and now they are self-managedand self-supporting, which is
great, and now they are part ofthe SLA.
So that was the intention postMacondo and it has maybe taken
10 years to develop it, but it'sthere yeah, absolutely.
Paul Kelway (36:11):
It is a fantastic achievement and it's sort of
bringing up all sorts ofmilestones which you, I
certainly remember well from myinvolvement as well.
Hugo Nijkamp (36:19):
That is important, paul, I mean I should also
mention you because I mean youhave also played that pivotal
role where you were in the USand we actually asked you to
join Sea Alarm and also to beinvolved in that collaborative
process and as part of Sea Alarmyou actually did huge amounts
of work and also demonstrate howthat network could be
(36:40):
coordinated by playing thatcoordinator role, and we allowed
you to do that completely,almost independent from Sea
Alarm.
But this has also created thatrole that it was very clear what
coordination would mean andthat is now being taken over by
GOWRS itself, by Adam is nowplaying that role.
That it was very clear whatcoordination would mean and that
is now being taken over byGOWRS itself, by Adam is now
playing that role.
So I mean your role in thatwhole process and we know each
(37:02):
other also.
25 years, that's something thatwe should also celebrate.
But your role also should bementioned doing that from
different organizations, becauseI talked with you when you were
still working for IBR also tolook at how do you see the
collaboration and how can youparticipate into that.
So, anyway, we've done lots ofthings together over the years.
Paul Kelway (37:24):
I mean it's a very rich history in terms of
development and I think, from myperspective, I think one of the
things I've always admiredabout Sea Alarm is not just how
productive and how effective SeaAlarm is as an organization,
but also as well I mean underyour leadership the fact that
it's always taken thissystems-wide approach.
It's always looked out and said, well, this is what we want to
do.
But to do that, we need to fixthe things around us and I think
(37:48):
always continuing to thinkabout that and just how much I
think that's brought, becauseultimately, all of these issues
are connected and all thestakeholders are connected and
Sea Alarm has driven that andit's been fantastic to have that
relationship between OSRL andSea Alarm to really work
together on that.
Hugo Nijkamp (38:03):
Yeah well, I'm also very grateful about this
long history.
This has been a journey, but ithadn't been possible by lots of
key individuals like RobHolland.
Obviously.
You are, for sure, also one ofthese people.
It's also funny that you camefrom Sea Alarm but you also have
a longer history in wildliferesponse.
(38:25):
We've grown together.
That has been a great process.
I just look forward to thefuture.
Paul Kelway (38:33):
There's lots of work to do Absolutely,
absolutely, and that is afantastic segue, I think, into
talking about the GOWRS, as acollective now provides this sla
service, which is a tier 3 oldwildlife assessment service.
So, with eurowa as a networkbeing established and GOWRS also
now being established, how doesSea Alarm work with those
(38:53):
networks now that they're inplace?
Hugo Nijkamp (38:58):
GOWRS is now self-managed and self-governed.
The SLA service is there, andthat is also a journey because,
in principle, you deliver thoseservices if it's needed, but you
also need to prepare for that.
So OSRL also sits itself inthat service because you're
providing the equipment andyou're also the main contact to
(39:19):
activate it.
So the three organizations, weneed to deliver this together,
and so we also have to explore,like, how can we maximize each
other's role and perfectlydefine it where it sits?
And that is an ongoing process,and what GOWRS is now providing
in the service is theassessment, but that also should
(39:40):
be followed by a response.
So doing that together is aquestion of dialogue, training
together, exercising togetherand communicating a lot Inside
GOWRS.
There is also representationfrom from Eurowa, because there
are three partners of the 10that are also in the Eurowa
network.
The European network is alsoself-governed.
(40:01):
That is where we still have thesecretariat function.
We do that pro bono.
That network is self-governedand that network has national
networks that sit underneath.
So we have national networks inFinland, in Estonia, in the
Netherlands, in Germany, andthat is a fantastic system to
(40:21):
look at, because you have, interms of philosophy, how you
respond and also the goodpractices and the concepts that
you want to put in place.
There is in that system.
It's from local networks thatunderstand it because they are
trained on the basis of thoseeuro guidelines and training.
But euro are being part of aglobal network that also sharing
(40:44):
the same standards and whereyou have different parties in
different continents that alsoin their immediate region, are
advocating, advocating that.
So you have that very logicallayered system that is in place
and that is really what makesthe world more prepared.
And then in Europe we also havethe government chipping in on
(41:06):
that, because there's also overthe years we've developed those
systems.
So you can then see that it allmeets each other and then it
suddenly works.
Paul Kelway (41:17):
Yeah, absolutely.
And let's talk about a morerecent incident to the ones that
we talked about earlier, whichwas the Bow Jubail incident.
That happened in RotterdamHarbor in the Netherlands in
2018, which Sea Alarm was veryinvolved in.
So you talk about thesedifferent levels of preparedness
In terms of that incident.
How did that incident differ interms of Sea Alarm was very
involved in?
So you talk about thesedifferent levels of preparedness
(41:38):
In terms of that incident.
How did that incident differ interms of, I suppose, the
response to looking at thoseincidents in the early 2000s?
What was different about thatin relation to a lot of those
that Sea Alarm that had beeninvolved in trying to advance?
Hugo Nijkamp (41:53):
Yeah, I would say that incident.
So it was a harbour spill.
It was a tanker.
It was empty, a chemical tanker, but it had just bunkered and
it ran into a pier.
The oil was actuallyimmediately through the tidal
system of the harbour ofRotterdam, was spreading out of
the harbour in a few hours andjust at that time there were
over 600 swans in that harbor indifferent places that were
(42:17):
there Also molting.
You know they were veryvulnerable and that oil spill
actually created over 500animals being oiled and just be
on the shore, and so it actuallycreated self-mobilizing
citizens rescuing these animals,assisted by the authorities,
but it's created a hugequantitative problem and then it
(42:38):
was decided to kick in thenational plan, which is owned by
Rijkswaterstaat.
Paul Kelway (42:43):
And they're an aspect of the Dutch government.
That's the industry thatoversees.
Hugo Nijkamp (42:46):
This leading oil spill response and it's also
responsible for wildlife and theenvironmental quality status
for wildlife and theenvironmental quality status.
So CLM in the Netherlands hasbeen involved since 2012 to
train and exercise.
So it's the implementation plan.
So that spill happened in theNetherlands is maybe lucky
because there was a lot ofpreparedness and then that spill
(43:08):
created this big problem.
The plan really was for theNorth Sea, not for the harbour.
That was a bit of an issue, butonce it was activated, part of
the activation in theNetherlands is that you can
respond on a large scale.
So there is a temporaryfacility that you can build up.
So the authorityRijkswaterstaat has a long-term
contract with a contractor thatknows how to do it, that there
(43:30):
has been an interaction betweenthem and also the wildlife
response experts.
So we knew how to do it.
We had also practiced it in avery expensive exercise, but we
knew how it should look like,and now we had to develop it for
swans.
But this is where Sea Alarm,with Rijkswaterstaat, we said we
need maximum qualityinternationally because at the
(43:51):
national level we have experts,but it's not enough, and so they
allowed Sea Alarm to actuallymobilize the international
network.
So we mobilized not only theEuropean experts from different
countries on the basis of theiravailability, but also we made
sure that GOWRS was aware ofthat and they also could
indicate if they had respondentsavailable and on the basis of
(44:12):
that availability we alsomobilized organizations from the
GOWRS network from othercontinents and together we
actually made it work.
And then you see that all theselevels tier one, tier two, tier
three can respond.
So the Bow Jubail had thateffect, where this was clearly
such a demonstration and for thefact that we could set up this
(44:34):
professional system large scalewas hugely impressive and it had
a lot of spin-off.
One spin-off was that theauthorities in the Netherlands
were so happy and proud thatthis has happened and so the
respect that they achieved fromthe public seeing that
professional and there wereministers going into that system
(44:54):
, you know, looking around andso there was such a positive
news.
But also in our report to theindustry, to the OSRL members,
this was such a clear evidencethat this tiered response is
working, but also the fact thatyou need to have the local
responders prepared to do that,and this ignited a discussion
(45:17):
within the members thateventually also led to another
investment to actually organizean industry workshop in Cyprus
to explore this.
So how prepared are we?
Now we need to look into it.
What does that response mean?
At that point there was clearthat GOWRS was building up and
that it was going to become aservice.
(45:39):
Then also to say is that enough, can we get away with that
globally?
We also were invited toorganize it and you were also
still in Sea Alarm and helpingto organize it, and also some
members of GOWRS were alsoinvolved in the organization.
The big eye-opener was asimulation exercise where really
you would say, well, throw adice, and here you are in a
(46:02):
country and now you have to makeit work.
And then all the participantssaid, yeah, you know, this is
crystal clear.
We need to actually invest intothat tiered response and making
sure that at the national levelwe encourage and also stimulate
that response capability.
The tier one, tier two areessential building blocks in the
tiered response.
So that workshop resulted in aroadmap and also resulted in the
(46:26):
community of practice which youare now leading with some
industry members.
But it was also that the peoplein cyprus said, okay, now we
have this insight, we we need tostick together.
We are actually a enlightenmentgroup that see it, but we need
to be the champions of gettingthis understood in our companies
.
So the community of practicewas actually the solution to
(46:47):
keep that as a mission, as ajourney.
Then the guidelines from thatwas also indicating how the
company do that and all theparticipants contributed to how
would the company do that andall the participants contributed
to what should a company do?
And that the workshop led toall kinds of insights like okay,
this is what a corporate levelneeds to be done, this is what
at a business unit level needsto be done in country, and that
(47:11):
is where it needs to happen.
And how can we support it withthe international expertise that
we have around us including,you know, gaus, including Sea
Alarm, including OSRL, includingITOPF, Cedre and all these
parties that can actually bringexpertise to the table.
And that was a main outcome.
And from that workshop, manypeople they came out of that
(47:32):
workshop really inspired and wehave captured that with that
community of practice.
Paul Kelway (47:37):
It was great that you bring that up.
I think it brings us up almostto where we are now and I think
if we look back through the last20 years, we can see so many
developments and I think thevalue of that collaboration and
bringing these differentstakeholders together.
You're talking a little bit nowalso about what's next, what
else is needed in terms ofactually making sure that what
(47:58):
has developed in the Netherlandswe see in other places, because
, as you say, the value therethat you had all three of those
components coming together in alot of places you don't.
So I mean, if we just sense,check where we are right now.
Looking ahead, what do you seeas the risks, the gaps that
remain?
What do you see as thosepriorities for the years ahead?
Hugo Nijkamp (48:18):
We learned to look around us, because the world is
changing all the time and onthat journey that you start in
the beginning, you find out likeyeah, things are changing, you
know, fundamentally changing.
You need to look around and oneof the issues that we have to
do is there are a number ofthings happening Climate change,
and that is more stormy andunusual weather environment
(48:42):
which could affect shipping.
There's the energy transition,which is alternative energy,
which results in wind farms atsea, but also the whole of the
shipping industry now investinginto alternative fuels and there
are transition fuels in themeantime.
So that is also where we areinvesting into Sea Alarm to
(49:03):
actually study that, and we dida European project to also look
at that.
But it also reflects back towildlife response and wildlife
response with that Because, onthe one hand, the energy
transition takes decades.
We want to do it very fast, butyou can see it runs into all
kinds of difficulties by whichthe timeline is unsure, but
(49:24):
there's a lot of politicalpressure and a lot of motivation
also in society to go that way.
So energy transition ishappening.
But if we look at the marineenvironment and the marine
wildlife, what are the new risksfor wildlife?
On the one hand you can say,well, oil is still around and it
will be still around fordecades because the ship owners
(49:45):
need to keep the current vesselsgoing and that needs still oil.
So oil is being transported.
So the risks are still there.
The fuel is still based on oil,even if it's alternative fuels.
It is now low sulfur oil orvery low self oil, and we've
studied this.
We are following that very witha lot of interest.
(50:05):
But the behavior of the newintermediate fuels are different
from the classical fuels.
That means that also theequipment doesn't work as you
would like to, so there's a needto look at it through it.
But it also means that in areal incident with those fuels
you know you might not be ableto stop the oil from going into
the wildlife areas and that oilwill have similar effects, you
(50:29):
know the same effect as the oldoil.
That way you can see that therisk relatively is increasing.
Then you've got the realalternative fuels like hydrogen,
methanol and biofuels,everything that is now coming on
the market.
Those come with different riskswhere you can say, well, yeah,
(50:50):
there are risks and those risksare always looked at as risks to
humans.
But the same risk for humans isalso for the animals.
That's the same.
Risk for humans is also for theanimals.
That's the same.
So we need to, as a wildliferesponse community, we have to
migrate our knowledge with thosethings, and it requires
(51:10):
research.
You know what are the effects?
Well, we have this conferenceeffects of oil on animals.
Yeah, oiled wildlife Great,fantastic, for decades.
But that terminology needs tobe widened.
It's pollution effects onwildlife.
That is the new for the decadesto come.
That's one part, and climatechange also leads to shifts into
(51:30):
where animals are, the species.
They might also be a bit moreat risk because they also, as a
population, are more vulnerable,and so the quality of the
response needs to also be there.
The importance of wildliferesponse preparedness is only
increasing, but we need tomigrate with that.
The other thing that we need todo in the SLA with the members
(51:51):
is to define and put in placethe next step providing a
response.
Because what is now in the SLAis the assessment Is the
response feasible, what ishappening and if it is feasible,
what is needed.
And that is where theassessment stops.
But the logical thing next isokay, we should respond, but
(52:14):
that needs also a furtherstructural embedding of how does
that transition go.
And I find it urgent becauseit's fantastic that we have the
GOWRS, but we also have thatexpertise at tier three level.
But what we need to explore isalso how effective can you be as
a tier three responseorganization if you're landing
(52:35):
in a country that is notprepared and on top of it,
mobilized by a company that isrelatively not and on top of it
mobilized by a company that isrelatively not as prepared for
wildlife as you would like tohave?
What can we do?
That is a serious discussionand it goes two ways that on the
one hand, we need to look atthe three organizations.
How, harry Potter can we be?
How can we make things happenin short time?
(52:58):
At which scale?
Because it's scale that isimportant.
We can always make thingshappen in short time.
At which scale?
Because it's scale that isimportant.
We can always make thingshappen.
But which scale can we actuallymake things happen.
So the Bow jubail 500, I don'tsay it's easy, but you can say
it's doable because you have theinfrastructure and the
capability.
But if you have to do that in Idon't know which country which
(53:18):
is not prepared, you don't havethe contractor that builds
temporary facility, you don'thave the authorities that are
buying in on it.
You don't have this.
All I think are empty gaps.
And then you come in as a tierthree, like, oh, that's a good
idea, you know?
Yeah, now how how big is thenthe facility and what are you
going to do with the otheranimals?
That goes into all kind ofthings.
(53:40):
That also you need to talk withthe local entities, because
it's about what can you do withan animal that you cannot treat.
You know euthanasia, that isnot in all cultures a
straightforward thing, and soall these things are important
to realize.
Paul Kelway (54:04):
Thank you for listening to the Response Force
Multiplier from OSRL.
Please like and subscribewherever you get your podcasts,
and stay tuned for more episodesas we continue to explore key
issues in emergency response andcrisis management.
For more information, head tooilspillresponse.
com.
See you soon.
Hello and welcome to the Response Force Multiplier
, a podcast that exploresemergency planning and response.
On the Response ForceMultiplier, we bring together
compelling experts and thoughtleaders to provide a fresh take
on key issues and cutting edgetechniques.
In each episode, we'll diveinto one aspect of emergency
(00:23):
planning and response and we'lluse OSRL's unique pool of
experts and collaborators togain new insights and to distill
these down into actionabletools and techniques for better
preparedness and response tocrisis incidents and emergencies
.
My name is Paul Kelway, we areOSRL and this is the Response
Force Multiplier.
We are OSRL and this is theResponse Force Multiplier.
Hugo Nijkamp (00:46):
So you've been the general manager of Sea Alarm
since it first started, obviouspoint to start with here is just
to ask you just to brieflyintroduce Sea Alarm in terms of
the organization and its mission.
Yeah well, Sea Alarm is a teamof four, based in Belgium, in
Brussels, but we've got a globalremit and very much also a
regional, european remit.
(01:06):
We specialize in oil andwildlife response and
preparedness and we want to bevery good at it and we want to
act as an impartial, independentactor and we place ourselves in
the middle of NGOs, industryand government, because in an
oil spill with wildlife, youneed all those three spheres,
(01:28):
and so we want to make sure thatall these actors in those
spheres can actually worktogether.
And in order to facilitate that, you have to be independent and
impartial yourself, you have toknow what you're talking about
and you must become some kind ofa trusted agent to all these
parties, and that has been ourmission.
Well, the mission has been tomake the world more prepared,
(01:52):
but our positioning and the waythat we try to internalize the
methodology is actually the keyto what we could achieve in that
way, you talk about thosedifferent stakeholder parties
that are really key, and OSRLand Sea Alarm are two
stakeholders within that sphere.
Paul Kelway (02:10):
The reason we're talking today, of course, is
that we're celebrating 20 yearsof the two organizations working
together.
So that takes us all the wayback to 2005, when that
relationship first started.
And I wanted to ask you because, if you look back the few years
before that, there was thisseries of remarkable events in
incidents, largely in europe,but with spills like the erica,
(02:32):
the treasure in south africa,but then also the prestige in
spain and the tricolor inbelgium.
So I wanted to ask you a littlebit about what was the state of
world wildlife preparedness inthose years and what gaps did
that expose, and what was seaalarms role in that time yeah, I
mean those were the days of thebig incidents, I would say, and
(02:53):
for sea alarm, as a startingorganization in this field, it
was a big baptizing.
Hugo Nijkamp (03:00):
But the preparedness in those days were
very low.
So the spills that you'rementioning happened in countries
that were not prepared.
Preparedness also is inrelation to the size of the
incident and these spills havebecome so famous because it had
such an overwhelming impact onwildlife coming ashore.
And with hindsight you know,with the knowledge of now, we
(03:22):
can also conclude that it's veryhard to be prepared if you get
overwhelmed in such numbers.
In those days governments didnot know what to do.
They got overwhelmed as welland also get paralyzed, almost
if you want.
And then you always getcitizens or NGOs that are
stepping into that vacuum andstart to rescue whatever they
(03:44):
can do or however it's presentedto them, and they self-organize
.
And what we also saw in thosedays were that there were a
number of organizationsinternationally that would also
self-mobilize into the area alsoto assist and also do what they
can, and that, I think, was thepicture over those years.
(04:05):
The reason that Sea Alarmactually was there was because
Sea Alarm was created in orderto facilitate that situation
where everybody would work onislands, not being connected
with governments, governmentsnot knowing what to do, etc.
So we actually came in not somuch self-mobilized, so we
actually were very much closelyworking with at that time, ITOPF
(04:30):
, and also with P&I Clubs andthe IOPC Funds, so Prestige, for
instance, they asked us tomobilize into the country on
their behalf and just to try tosee what is happening.
Can we do anything to actuallymake those connections?
And that's what we did.
And so I must say that also inour role in those incidents, in
(04:52):
the fact that it wasoverwhelming and all parties
doing their best, it gave us somuch lessons to learn, having
seen this and also from aperspective like what are the
gaps and how can we fill thosegaps.
We also were identified, I think, by ITOPF as an organization
(05:12):
that could fill also gaps forthem that would take care of
wildlife not being seen by theincident command and later on
having lots of costs that theywanted to get compensated for
but nobody knew what they haddone, so they could not be
compensated for that reason.
(05:33):
So italk actually identified inwhat we were aiming to do as
like, okay, let's give this achance, because if this could be
solved by learning from thoselessons, creating networks,
let's say, of more experiencedorganizations that can actually
be used to build a morestructured and more organized
(05:55):
wildlife response.
That is worth to try.
And so ITOPF basically gave usa lot of coaching and support,
also to introduce us into theindustry realm of shipping, P&I
clubs all of that including OSRLobviously and also coached us
to understand how these systemswork, which we could then also
project and translate towardsthe role of governments and the
(06:19):
role of NGOs, and so very muchin those early years ITOPF was
really instrumental also for usto develop into this impartial
and independent role.
Paul Kelway (06:32):
That's probably a good segue to my next question,
which is you mentioned OSRL.
So what were the circumstancesaround OSRL and Sea Alarm coming
together more formally then atthe beginning?
What were the aims initially ofthat collaboration?
Hugo Nijkamp (06:49):
Well, it was also again with the assistance of
ITOPF, introducing us also to,for instance, Ipieca's oil spill
working group and also madesure that I would make some
presentations there to get thatgroup interested.
And out of that group therewere a few individuals and also
ITOPF championing this.
So you always need that fewpeople that have visionary
(07:12):
picture of where it should goand also to see like, okay, this
needs some support.
And there were champions alsoin some of the companies that
also said, okay, we need to dothis, we need to develop this.
Companies that also said, okay,we need to do this, we need to
develop this.
And it actually started thatSea Alarm was invited to lead a
project to actually develop adocument that would indicate
what is needed.
(07:32):
You know how do you plan andhow do you prepare for wildlife.
That project actually resultedin the famous volume 13 in the
report series of Aikika.
So we were leading that project.
But obviously we actuallyorganized the whole working
group around it.
So we knew key people that wereinternationally the lead
experts in wildlife response,all kinds of individuals from
(07:56):
the industry.
Itop was on board.
So we actually created amulti-sectoral working group to
actually look into like, how dowe actually nail this.
And that resulted in thatdocument.
And when the document waspublished by IPIECA, they also
thought, yeah, okay, now we'vegot the document, but who's
going to work on it?
And that created somethingwhere they said, okay, you know,
(08:18):
the mission of Sea Alarm isgood.
They've also combined andlinked different groups together
.
Apparently they can do that.
And Sea Alarm was not wellfunded at that moment, you know,
and it was just me and a fewpeople that did it at that
moment, most of the time almostfreelance and very limited.
(08:38):
And I also said to the industry,like, if you want to continue
this, then yeah, you know, wehave to solve that, because
otherwise I cannot simply do it.
And so they.
So they said, okay, then weactually organize something that
you should maybe work with oilspill response limited to
actually create that basis bywhich we can actually make this
happen.
So they actually facilitatedthat and in the early years I
(09:02):
remember that also well was abit surprised because they did
not do anything.
Wildlife, that was not theirthing.
And it was also very much likeokay, a bit uneasy, you know, to
be honest, and in the beginning, like what should we do?
How do we do it?
And it was also where we formeda steering group, where I asked
if ITOPF would also be therejust to facilitate that process,
(09:24):
that we had to work togetherand also on a mission that was
totally new, you know, foreverybody, also for the industry
at large, because also thecompanies you know they were
quite live.
so you had these few championsin the industry that were also
leading, influential indiscussions in those forums that
(09:46):
industry had, like the oilspill working group, and that
made it happen.
So it was really a journeywhere nobody would exactly know
where it would go to and we justkicked it off and do the best
we could.
Paul Kelway (10:02):
When you mention the uncertainty or just how to
introduce and integrate this newtopic.
So it points to this to somedegree.
But what was the relationshipto wildlife response from the
oil industry at the time?
Obviously, you know certaincountries at that time maybe was
more accepted than others, butin general, what was the
(10:22):
experience at that time, havingto engage in these conversations
about taking it more seriouslyor integrating it more fully?
Hugo Nijkamp (10:29):
yeah, I would say the industry did not have oil
wildlife response as a targetbecause and it's totally
understandable, because ithappens or it doesn't happen and
at that time industry was somuch in that time frame still,
you know working out their owngood practices on how to respond
to oil spills in general, andso the focus of those activities
(10:54):
were going into broader oilspill management.
So experiences with bigincidents where the oil industry
actually was confronted withhuge wildlife impact were very
limited too.
There were a few officers inoil companies that had managed
some of these wildlife incidentsand they were actually amongst
(11:15):
those champions that wanted toreach out to also their
colleagues, like, yeah, you know, this is something that is
important, but themisunderstanding, I think, and
also the underestimation thateverybody has was like, yeah,
you know, this is something thatis important, but the
misunderstanding, I think, andalso the underestimation that
everybody has was like, yeah,you know, wildlife, that is a
few ducks that actually arriveon the shore and what's the big
deal here?
You know, there are always NGOsthat pick them up and they wash
(11:37):
them and they release them and,yeah, why should we prepare for
that?
Prepare for that?
And so the description of whata wildlife response is and the
gradual increase in complexitythat is generated by the number
of animals washing ashore.
That was unknown, not realized.
So that has been the effort SeaAlarm, but also many other
(12:00):
organizations, try toincreasingly describe and
present so that it becamesomething also at that level of
a science to be respected by thepeople in those positions that
would actually direct funds hereand there, and I remember that
was a long, long journey, andnot only with the industry but
(12:21):
also with OSRL.
We actually said we need tomake the world more prepared.
It's not only the industry.
We need to work withgovernments, we need to create
governmental language so thatgovernments support it.
And it comes back to that, thethree domains that we need to
look at.
And, to be perfectly fair, wealso had to work with the NGOs,
(12:44):
even the experts, to also havethat education.
How do we all do it?
Do we all do it the same?
Are there standards?
What are those standards?
If we work with industry, howwould we do that?
What is our experience?
Where are the gaps?
Because everybody knew that ifwe go out, there is no kind of
gaps and by which you are moreor less standing alone.
(13:05):
Whatever you can do.
Yeah, you grab an animal, youstart rehabilitating them
according to good practice,that's what you do, but does
that make any difference on thebigger scale of things?
That was the essence, and I Ioversee, let's say, the 25 years
of this work and I can say thatthat was the most
(13:26):
mission-driven activities, with,in the beginning, very slow
resonance that you create, butgradually you get people more
interested.
And it was also to actuallypresent those incidents that we
were talking about, becausethose were the incidents that
you could actually demonstrate.
But you had to tell it in acertain way so that it would
(13:48):
resonate in the language thatpeople would understand.
And that has been a journeyalso for ourselves, like you
know.
First of all you think, oh, youknow, it's a clear issue, we
just present it and they willsee it.
But they don't, because theydon't recognize what they want
to see.
And you always have an audiencethat feel it irrelevant, like,
(14:08):
oh, the next session is aboutwhite life.
Okay, you know, then I'm goingto work a bit on my computer
long journey.
But I think we have insisted tocontinue that, and gradually
also as well.
You know, rob ho Holland is,for instance, one of these
persons that from the beginningwas really interested, also
personally, to get this goingand he did a lot of mission work
(14:32):
to also internally OSRL in thefirst place.
So there are some people herelike Rob Holland that did so
much.
So, looking back, just a numberof people that we tried to link
together and actually make surethat you have some kind of a
critical mass of visionarypeople that have also some
influence.
And that has been, I think, athread line over those years
(14:57):
continuously grabbing the peoplethat you see, oh, you know that
is a person that is influentialand understands it, and we
always, also in Sea Alarm, tryto bind those people to that
mission and even we had alwaysthat kind of people also on our
board to make sure that theytotally understand the whole
picture and the mission initself and become missionaries.
Paul Kelway (15:19):
Well, let's talk about over 20 years.
Just some of the achievementsof that work together.
You mentioned Rob Holland, mycolleague here at OSRL.
Over 20 years, just some of theachievements of that work
together.
You mentioned rob holland, mycolleague here at osrl.
So the relationship betweenosrl and clm has enabled a
number of preparednessdeliverables over the years.
So one of those has been theservice to osrl's members of
guaranteed access to clm'stechnical advice.
(15:39):
So I did want to just ask youwhat is that service and why is
that important to OSRL's members?
Hugo Nijkamp (15:46):
Yeah, that was from the beginning.
When Sea Alarm and OSRL startedworking together, it was
obviously that it was to servethe industry in incidents.
So if Sea Alarm then was theactor to actually advise and to
(16:07):
have that growing knowledgeabout how it would work and how
this would become effective,then we would also be a good
advisor that could be activatedif industry ran into a problem.
From the beginning that was oneof the services that OSRL and
Sea Alarm defined Okay, we aregoing to collaborate.
So OSRL would say, if one ofour members gets into a wildlife
incident, then yeah, we alsoneed to act.
This was a big issue for us tostep into because that was 24-7.
(16:30):
But it also motivated the factthat Sea Alarm also should be on
the phone all the time.
So that also motivated thefunding scheme on which the
collaboration was faced.
The 24-7 advisory that has nowbeen existing 20 years, and not
only in real-time incident butalso in exercises, and I think
(16:54):
through exercises that role alsocould be visualized, where you
also can demonstrate what youbring to the table.
So I think that has beenessential.
It also has actually given us atask from the beginning like oh
my God, and really that hascreated a lot of awareness with
us, like we are in that role.
(17:15):
We were the only, literally theonly advisor that industry would
activate globally.
But then you look at the worldand the diversity of the world,
not only in countries, but alsoin biodiversity.
So you have tropicalenvironments, we've got polar
environments and then anythingin between.
Then you suddenly realize like,oh, my god, you know what are
(17:36):
the wildlife response profiles,you know.
So you say well, okay, that isimportant, there needs to be
some advice.
But at the same time youimportant, there needs to be
some advice, but at the sametime you think like this needs
to be developed.
You know we need to haveconcepts.
So it has driven in ourorganization, but also trying to
(17:59):
make everybody around us aware,like, guys, you know, if this
is going on and you would bemobilized also as an expert,
what are you going to do?
Is it in your comfort zone oroutside of your comfort zone?
And, to be perfectly honest,where we are now, today, we've
achieved a lot, but there'sstill so much where our
mobilization will be out of ourcomfort zone and that really
(18:20):
needs to be addressed and we areaddressing that.
You know it is important.
Paul Kelway (18:27):
You specifically mentioned understanding the
profiles of certain countries,and so another tool that was
developed by Sea Alarm, again aspart of the work with OSRL is
indeed a database of thoseprofiles.
You have actively developed amore coherent picture or
understanding of if that countryhas preparedness systems.
So could you just introducethat as a tool and also perhaps
(18:51):
say, having looked at that andhaving almost developed more of
a complete picture, what doesthat tell us?
You were alluding to it alreadyin terms of being out of our
comfort zone, but what does thattell us about the state of
preparedness globally?
Hugo Nijkamp (19:03):
This was actually a project that started in those
early days.
We didn't have that contractwith Australia, but one of the
champions were people in BP andthey were saying we are
perfectly interested, you know,in what you're doing, but, yes,
maybe we can already get yougoing by funding you, by giving
us some profiles about howprepared our countries and they
(19:26):
knew that we were European based.
So they said, well, you know,start with Europe.
And while we actually startedto create those profiles, which
was basically like what is thelevel of preparedness of
different countries andgovernmental systems?
Also the kind of wildlifescenarios that you could expect
Not so much the scenarios infull extent, but just what kind
(19:46):
of animals can you expect and sowe started that for a few
countries.
And while we were doing that,then we actually were linked to
OSRL and then OSRL and Sea Alarmsaid, okay, you know, this
could be really a goodinvestment to include in the
project.
We also were very muchadvocating that because, yeah,
you need to know who's whom.
(20:07):
Also, in this bill, it would bevery good to pre-identify which
ministries, which governmentalagencies would be the leading
parties.
And the idea was also, if weactually did develop a profile,
you need to contact thecountries and, who knows, is
there some resonance Like, oh,we are not prepared.
And there are some countries,like Brazil, that was not aware
(20:30):
of where they would go withwildlife response and they
certainly by our interview,certainly realized we don't have
it and we've got a lot ofactivities out there and now
Brazil is one of the mostprepared countries.
It is not because of ourcountry profile, but I remember
that the governmental agencyrealized that this was a gap and
to their colleagues, we need todo something.
(20:51):
And they were actuallydemanding like, okay, the
industry should have a plan inplace.
That was coming out of thatprocess.
Our role was very minimal butit lights a spark.
So over the years we haveprogressively done most of the
coastal countries on the world.
So all these profiles, theyhave different dimensions.
(21:12):
What are the species?
What are the governments?
What can we expect if somethinghappens?
Has there been wildlifeincidents in the past or big
incidents, that kind of stuff?
We have now over a hundredcountries, so really impressive.
And that also requires that atsome point you need to start
maintaining it, because it'sobviously always a snapshot in
(21:34):
time.
So we are very much maintainingit.
Sometimes there's a new one.
Sometimes we are investing intoupdating it.
But if you look at the world mapwith countries that we managed
to do, we know more or less howprepared the world is.
It's a good overview.
And then you start to look atokay, you know, can we actually
do some kind of a classificationwhere you can see like, okay,
(21:57):
there's a graduation, maybe anexperience, maybe they had
experience and there might besome leftovers in terms of
organizations that are stillinterested in training
themselves to the highest level,which is countries that have a
plan in place and not having aplan in place but also an
implementation plan, so thatit's not a plan on the shelf but
(22:18):
also a implementation programlinked to it that actually keeps
the resources in a good shape,program linked to it that
actually keeps the resources ina good shape.
No-transcript.
Fantastic.
If it's a big country, thenimmediately you know you get a
big green spot on the map, so itlooks really impressive.
But there's also smallercountries that do it and that
(22:39):
you cannot see the difference.
But there's certainly there.
But it always highlights theabsolute majority of countries
that are very little or notprepared, and that is often also
in areas where there's industryactivities, and that raises the
question okay, there are risks,and obviously it doesn't happen
(23:02):
that often, but you need tocreate awareness around that.
Paul Kelway (23:06):
Well, we should say that that database is a freely
available resource through SeaAlarm.
It's something thatstakeholders can access and look
at that information.
Hugo Nijkamp (23:16):
I would say the database is not public.
We have a huge database inwhich you also keep the
organizations and also theexpertise.
We cannot publish that, butwhat we publish is the narrative
.
So we are describing whatpreparedness levels are.
The aim in the very beginning,in the dialogue with BP, we both
realized that doing thatinvestigation also creates
(23:38):
intelligence, if you want, aboutwho's whom in those countries.
So if we then are mobilized asan advisor by the industry, we
also have that materialimmediately available.
So if it's as up-to as we cankeep it, it gives us this
critical advantage of not havingto do lots of phone calls or
(24:00):
whatever.
We immediately can actuallycontact people in country to see
what's happening and it createsthat advantage of maybe a few
days where you have a good entryof information.
Paul Kelway (24:13):
Yeah, that's the great added value of building
that picture and, as you say, Imean Sea Alarm.
There's that technical advisoryrole, which is essentially just
because the world is notprepared and it's at least being
able to tap into that advice,building that picture, but also
then hopefully working withstakeholders to move the needle
and see more of those countriesbeing proactive and moving
things forward.
And part of that in terms ofSea Alarm's role has been trying
(24:36):
to create more structuralrelationships between these key
stakeholders, between Oil Spillresponse organizations,
government and industry.
And I guess the question onthat is what's been the focus of
that work and what has been theachievements around that over
the last 20 years?
Hugo Nijkamp (24:52):
Well, there were many achievements and I would
say also the contract and therelationship with OSRL in the
background has been a very firmbasis under what we've done,
just for the fact that to havethat stability also allows us to
have all kinds of activitiesdeveloping in that realm.
So one of the things that Iwould like to highlight is also
(25:16):
our work in Europe.
Obviously, this is our backyardand if you look at it globally,
europe has lots ofcollaboration between
authorities, between countriesfor oil spill response
management and globally you'vegot conventions that all coastal
countries have signed.
You know that you have to worktogether, but in Europe I think
(25:36):
it's one of the regions wherethere's a lot of collaboration
and that originally was verymuch on regional seas like the
Baltic Sea.
You've got HELCOM, then you'vegot the North Sea, atlantic is
Bonn Agreement and in theMediterranean you've got the
Barcelona Agreement and then youalmost have covered all the
coastal waters, not only coastalbut also offshore waters where
(25:58):
spill can happen.
And you've got the EuropeanCommission and the European
Commission being part of allthese agreements, but also the
party that can come with a lotof funding to do projects.
That was not accessible when wewere starting because we were
too small and we could not makeproposals.
But the moment that we actually, through the contract with OSRL
(26:20):
, had, let's say, substance andwe had people really on the
payroll, that was qualifying usas a party that could develop
proposals and where you have topartner, so we did not waste the
opportunity.
And where you have to partner,so we did not waste the
opportunity.
In one of the first years, Imean, we had three of those
projects proposed and financedOne we were leading ourselves
(26:42):
and the others we werepartnering.
But they were all aboutwildlife response.
One was a scientific projectwhat is the impact on animal
populations?
How do we measure it?
To develop a guideline.
One was to actually train andfind wildlife responders that
were knowing each other.
But through that project weactually started developing,
working together, also lookingat guidelines.
(27:03):
And there was a third we wereleading ourselves and OSRL was
also partnering in that onewhere we actually created a
European wildlife document thatwas actually advocating that
governments should plan for itand how they do it.
And that was the start of, overthe years, numerous European
(27:23):
projects that we could actuallydevelop that were all directed
towards making sure thatgovernments, increasingly, would
take this seriously and havedocuments, plans and also
systems in place for mutualassistance, for instance.
And meanwhile, through thatproject we could actually build
our European network, eroa.
That were organizations thatknew each other from these
(27:46):
spills and knew that we were allaiming at good practices, and
those projects actually allowedus to set up EUROWA, not only as
a network, but also a wholephilosophy of making experts
more prepared, working with thegovernment agencies to train,
and that has created a hugespinoff that all these regional
agreements have adopted.
(28:07):
So all the regional agreementshave plans for mutual assistance
and dealing with wildliferesponse.
Increasing number of countriesare actually venturing into
planning, so Europe in thatsense, has a lot of governmental
standards that could also beshared internationally, like how
do you do that, what are thoseplans?
(28:28):
And so there's a lot of valuecreated there that also would
benefit not only responsesinternationally but also
preparedness processesinternationally.
It's a question of advocatingthis and having all that
material in your hand.
So it's huge and yeah, I wouldsay that that was unthinkable in
(28:48):
the early days that we get thatfar, but it has boosted a lot
of preparedness and thinking,preparedness and recognition.
Paul Kelway (28:58):
Yeah, incredible progress.
So that speaks to Europe and,as you mentioned, there were
some elements of that in termsof some of those projects that
there was some Sea Alarmcollaborated on.
The other one, of course, wherethere was strong collaboration
was on that more globalintegration piece, more directed
at the industry, which hasended up culminating in what's
now a service through GOWRS.
Can you talk also just aboutwhat was the alarm's role in
(29:19):
that conversation and trying tomove the needle on that
integration?
Hugo Nijkamp (29:23):
yeah, there were various reasons why that should
be developed.
One was obviously that for allthese years, we felt very alone
in that 24 on 7, because wewould be an advisor, but what
you would need eventually ispeople that can actually respond
, and meanwhile, we wereactually trying to bind those
organizations also inviting theminto meetings or workshops that
(29:47):
we would fund out of theproject, where those
organizations would cometogether, discuss these things,
but they didn't have any formalrelationship with the industry
at large and that was, I felt,always not a good situation.
They should somehow be part ofthis system.
The Macondo incident in 2010was one of these big incidents
(30:08):
that was a global game changer,also for the industry, and that
did a few things.
Game changer also for theindustry and that did a few
things.
One of the things was itgenerated a lot of interest into
wildlife response and at thatpoint, I think OSRL, Sea Alarm
were very much in a place thatwe had a good language for that
to stimulate that, and Iremember at that moment, lots of
(30:31):
projects was reining in intoSea Alarm Many companies wanting
to explore or having a plan inplace for wildlife, and it was
overwhelmingly much, and what wedid is actually taking that as
a mechanism to involve theseorganizations that we thought
would be important to get onboard so that we could work
(30:51):
together.
We could actually also exchangeideas and the philosophy of
what is a good plan, what isgood preparedness.
So that was one of the processes.
The other process was thatorganizations were still working
on islands and so we usedinternational meetings like the
IOSC et cetera, where theseorganizations would come to, but
also effects of oil on wildlifeconferences to start talking.
(31:14):
And so after the Macondo weactually thought we have now
funds because also theconsultancies gave income and
also some budget for us toactually travel to those
organizations.
So we visited them where theywere having private
conversations, like, okay, youknow, how do you see this, what
would be your blockages thatmight occur, why would you not
(31:37):
do it and can we take that away?
And also that pre-work wasactually to assess if everybody
was willing and would considerthat collaboration.
We also put them together inone room in several occasions
where we get everybody aroundthe table and try to speak about
it.
So that was a process going onto a moment in an EOW in New
(31:57):
Orleans where I thought you know, do you want it or not.
You know, I want to see it.
And that was reallyconfirmation like, yes, we would
like to do that.
And then Rob Holland was thereas well, and I remember Rob and
I sitting on the terrace like,yeah, now we have to materialize
this.
You know that they are ready todo it, but now we need to
actually have industry gettinginto a process that it can be
(32:17):
developed, and that led to theidea to have an Interspill lunch
meeting the famous lunchmeeting in 2012, where we had
champions in the room and allinternational organizations that
mattered, and then we actuallypresented this is your problem,
(32:41):
but also this is your solution.
You know you can now access theworld's finest experts on a
mission that we are creatingthat service for you, and we
called it immediately likethat's a global wildlife
response system, and thatmeeting actually led to an
invitation from the industrysaying, okay, great, write us a
plan.
And then we created a workforcewith different organizations to
develop that plan, and also weinvited different industry
(33:04):
organizations.
I thought to also be part of itso that it would be a good
structure, and so we had then aplan and I, with Rob, all of
that we called it dragon's den,where we had to sell that
proposal to industry highestlevels investors.
That took years.
The idea was good, but thetiming of funding were all kind
(33:25):
of things that had all thepriorities, so it took a few
years where we had to rewriteproposal, put it in, pitch it
again.
Know, there was a lot of thingsthat Rob and I did, but
eventually in 2015, it was done.
Okay, Ipieca actually had moneypost-Macondo that they wanted
to spend on that.
So the project started under anIPIECA contract and then we
(33:47):
contracted the 10 organizationsthat were willing to collaborate
.
And that was a journey as wellto see how are we going to do
this, what would be the standardoperational procedure?
What is the good practice.
So those two things were, inthose early days, the key.
And then that's a difficultprocess at the same time because
you have to do itinternationally, so you have to
(34:09):
come together, you have to do itduring a week where everybody
can attend, and then you've gotthe workforce and then between
that, yeah, there's a bit ofwork, everybody busy, so it's a
process that actually took moreyears than we anticipated.
But industry understood that andactually OSRL then stepped in
to say, okay, with our members,we will actually continue
(34:31):
funding of it.
So the contracts switched toOSRL, still to Sea Alarm,
because we had all thatsubcontracts already in place,
and so we did that in a fewextensions until we came to a
point and that was also a thirdline in the development where we
actually encouraged those 10organizations to be
(34:51):
self-governed.
So from the beginning weactually did that to make sure
that they had language and alsosome documents that would
actually bind them together likea self organizing system and in
the end also to make sure thatthey could exist outside of Sea
Alarm in the first place, sothat we were actually
facilitating that throughcontracts and the whole
(35:12):
financial management ofeverything that we did.
But that also needed to be moreindependent and that led to the
decision of GOWRS to actuallyset up their own entity and
eventually they would actuallyprovide that service, which is
the assessment team service thatrecently now has been signed,
(35:33):
which is over those years.
It took a long time, but for theright reasons, because it is
complex.
You know that 10 organizationsglobally with different cultures
, different experiences,different systems.
They need to do it together,which is a fantastic thing, and
obviously we facilitated thatand also providing that support.
But eventually that group hasorganized themselves quite well
(35:57):
and now they are self-managedand self-supporting, which is
great, and now they are part ofthe SLA.
So that was the intention postMacondo and it has maybe taken
10 years to develop it, but it'sthere yeah, absolutely.
Paul Kelway (36:11):
It is a fantastic achievement and it's sort of
bringing up all sorts ofmilestones which you, I
certainly remember well from myinvolvement as well.
Hugo Nijkamp (36:19):
That is important, paul, I mean I should also
mention you because I mean youhave also played that pivotal
role where you were in the USand we actually asked you to
join Sea Alarm and also to beinvolved in that collaborative
process and as part of Sea Alarmyou actually did huge amounts
of work and also demonstrate howthat network could be
(36:40):
coordinated by playing thatcoordinator role, and we allowed
you to do that completely,almost independent from Sea
Alarm.
But this has also created thatrole that it was very clear what
coordination would mean andthat is now being taken over by
GOWRS itself, by Adam is nowplaying that role.
That it was very clear whatcoordination would mean and that
is now being taken over byGOWRS itself, by Adam is now
playing that role.
So I mean your role in thatwhole process and we know each
(37:02):
other also.
25 years, that's something thatwe should also celebrate.
But your role also should bementioned doing that from
different organizations, becauseI talked with you when you were
still working for IBR also tolook at how do you see the
collaboration and how can youparticipate into that.
So, anyway, we've done lots ofthings together over the years.
Paul Kelway (37:24):
I mean it's a very rich history in terms of
development and I think, from myperspective, I think one of the
things I've always admiredabout Sea Alarm is not just how
productive and how effective SeaAlarm is as an organization,
but also as well I mean underyour leadership the fact that
it's always taken thissystems-wide approach.
It's always looked out and said, well, this is what we want to
do.
But to do that, we need to fixthe things around us and I think
(37:48):
always continuing to thinkabout that and just how much I
think that's brought, becauseultimately, all of these issues
are connected and all thestakeholders are connected and
Sea Alarm has driven that andit's been fantastic to have that
relationship between OSRL andSea Alarm to really work
together on that.
Hugo Nijkamp (38:03):
Yeah well, I'm also very grateful about this
long history.
This has been a journey, but ithadn't been possible by lots of
key individuals like RobHolland.
Obviously.
You are, for sure, also one ofthese people.
It's also funny that you camefrom Sea Alarm but you also have
a longer history in wildliferesponse.
(38:25):
We've grown together.
That has been a great process.
I just look forward to thefuture.
Paul Kelway (38:33):
There's lots of work to do Absolutely,
absolutely, and that is afantastic segue, I think, into
talking about the GOWRS, as acollective now provides this sla
service, which is a tier 3 oldwildlife assessment service.
So, with eurowa as a networkbeing established and GOWRS also
now being established, how doesSea Alarm work with those
(38:53):
networks now that they're inplace?
Hugo Nijkamp (38:58):
GOWRS is now self-managed and self-governed.
The SLA service is there, andthat is also a journey because,
in principle, you deliver thoseservices if it's needed, but you
also need to prepare for that.
So OSRL also sits itself inthat service because you're
providing the equipment andyou're also the main contact to
(39:19):
activate it.
So the three organizations, weneed to deliver this together,
and so we also have to explore,like, how can we maximize each
other's role and perfectlydefine it where it sits?
And that is an ongoing process,and what GOWRS is now providing
in the service is theassessment, but that also should
(39:40):
be followed by a response.
So doing that together is aquestion of dialogue, training
together, exercising togetherand communicating a lot Inside
GOWRS.
There is also representationfrom from Eurowa, because there
are three partners of the 10that are also in the Eurowa
network.
The European network is alsoself-governed.
(40:01):
That is where we still have thesecretariat function.
We do that pro bono.
That network is self-governedand that network has national
networks that sit underneath.
So we have national networks inFinland, in Estonia, in the
Netherlands, in Germany, andthat is a fantastic system to
(40:21):
look at, because you have, interms of philosophy, how you
respond and also the goodpractices and the concepts that
you want to put in place.
There is in that system.
It's from local networks thatunderstand it because they are
trained on the basis of thoseeuro guidelines and training.
But euro are being part of aglobal network that also sharing
(40:44):
the same standards and whereyou have different parties in
different continents that alsoin their immediate region, are
advocating, advocating that.
So you have that very logicallayered system that is in place
and that is really what makesthe world more prepared.
And then in Europe we also havethe government chipping in on
(41:06):
that, because there's also overthe years we've developed those
systems.
So you can then see that it allmeets each other and then it
suddenly works.
Paul Kelway (41:17):
Yeah, absolutely.
And let's talk about a morerecent incident to the ones that
we talked about earlier, whichwas the Bow Jubail incident.
That happened in RotterdamHarbor in the Netherlands in
2018, which Sea Alarm was veryinvolved in.
So you talk about thesedifferent levels of preparedness
In terms of that incident.
How did that incident differ interms of Sea Alarm was very
involved in?
So you talk about thesedifferent levels of preparedness
(41:38):
In terms of that incident.
How did that incident differ interms of, I suppose, the
response to looking at thoseincidents in the early 2000s?
What was different about thatin relation to a lot of those
that Sea Alarm that had beeninvolved in trying to advance?
Hugo Nijkamp (41:53):
Yeah, I would say that incident.
So it was a harbour spill.
It was a tanker.
It was empty, a chemical tanker, but it had just bunkered and
it ran into a pier.
The oil was actuallyimmediately through the tidal
system of the harbour ofRotterdam, was spreading out of
the harbour in a few hours andjust at that time there were
over 600 swans in that harbor indifferent places that were
(42:17):
there Also molting.
You know they were veryvulnerable and that oil spill
actually created over 500animals being oiled and just be
on the shore, and so it actuallycreated self-mobilizing
citizens rescuing these animals,assisted by the authorities,
but it's created a hugequantitative problem and then it
(42:38):
was decided to kick in thenational plan, which is owned by
Rijkswaterstaat.
Paul Kelway (42:43):
And they're an aspect of the Dutch government.
That's the industry thatoversees.
Hugo Nijkamp (42:46):
This leading oil spill response and it's also
responsible for wildlife and theenvironmental quality status
for wildlife and theenvironmental quality status.
So CLM in the Netherlands hasbeen involved since 2012 to
train and exercise.
So it's the implementation plan.
So that spill happened in theNetherlands is maybe lucky
because there was a lot ofpreparedness and then that spill
(43:08):
created this big problem.
The plan really was for theNorth Sea, not for the harbour.
That was a bit of an issue, butonce it was activated, part of
the activation in theNetherlands is that you can
respond on a large scale.
So there is a temporaryfacility that you can build up.
So the authorityRijkswaterstaat has a long-term
contract with a contractor thatknows how to do it, that there
(43:30):
has been an interaction betweenthem and also the wildlife
response experts.
So we knew how to do it.
We had also practiced it in avery expensive exercise, but we
knew how it should look like,and now we had to develop it for
swans.
But this is where Sea Alarm,with Rijkswaterstaat, we said we
need maximum qualityinternationally because at the
(43:51):
national level we have experts,but it's not enough, and so they
allowed Sea Alarm to actuallymobilize the international
network.
So we mobilized not only theEuropean experts from different
countries on the basis of theiravailability, but also we made
sure that GOWRS was aware ofthat and they also could
indicate if they had respondentsavailable and on the basis of
(44:12):
that availability we alsomobilized organizations from the
GOWRS network from othercontinents and together we
actually made it work.
And then you see that all theselevels tier one, tier two, tier
three can respond.
So the Bow Jubail had thateffect, where this was clearly
such a demonstration and for thefact that we could set up this
(44:34):
professional system large scalewas hugely impressive and it had
a lot of spin-off.
One spin-off was that theauthorities in the Netherlands
were so happy and proud thatthis has happened and so the
respect that they achieved fromthe public seeing that
professional and there wereministers going into that system
(44:54):
, you know, looking around andso there was such a positive
news.
But also in our report to theindustry, to the OSRL members,
this was such a clear evidencethat this tiered response is
working, but also the fact thatyou need to have the local
responders prepared to do that,and this ignited a discussion
(45:17):
within the members thateventually also led to another
investment to actually organizean industry workshop in Cyprus
to explore this.
So how prepared are we?
Now we need to look into it.
What does that response mean?
At that point there was clearthat GOWRS was building up and
that it was going to become aservice.
(45:39):
Then also to say is that enough, can we get away with that
globally?
We also were invited toorganize it and you were also
still in Sea Alarm and helpingto organize it, and also some
members of GOWRS were alsoinvolved in the organization.
The big eye-opener was asimulation exercise where really
you would say, well, throw adice, and here you are in a
(46:02):
country and now you have to makeit work.
And then all the participantssaid, yeah, you know, this is
crystal clear.
We need to actually invest intothat tiered response and making
sure that at the national levelwe encourage and also stimulate
that response capability.
The tier one, tier two areessential building blocks in the
tiered response.
So that workshop resulted in aroadmap and also resulted in the
(46:26):
community of practice which youare now leading with some
industry members.
But it was also that the peoplein cyprus said, okay, now we
have this insight, we we need tostick together.
We are actually a enlightenmentgroup that see it, but we need
to be the champions of gettingthis understood in our companies
.
So the community of practicewas actually the solution to
(46:47):
keep that as a mission, as ajourney.
Then the guidelines from thatwas also indicating how the
company do that and all theparticipants contributed to how
would the company do that andall the participants contributed
to what should a company do?
And that the workshop led toall kinds of insights like okay,
this is what a corporate levelneeds to be done, this is what
at a business unit level needsto be done in country, and that
(47:11):
is where it needs to happen.
And how can we support it withthe international expertise that
we have around us including,you know, gaus, including Sea
Alarm, including OSRL, includingITOPF, Cedre and all these
parties that can actually bringexpertise to the table.
And that was a main outcome.
And from that workshop, manypeople they came out of that
(47:32):
workshop really inspired and wehave captured that with that
community of practice.
Paul Kelway (47:37):
It was great that you bring that up.
I think it brings us up almostto where we are now and I think
if we look back through the last20 years, we can see so many
developments and I think thevalue of that collaboration and
bringing these differentstakeholders together.
You're talking a little bit nowalso about what's next, what
else is needed in terms ofactually making sure that what
(47:58):
has developed in the Netherlandswe see in other places, because
, as you say, the value therethat you had all three of those
components coming together in alot of places you don't.
So I mean, if we just sense,check where we are right now.
Looking ahead, what do you seeas the risks, the gaps that
remain?
What do you see as thosepriorities for the years ahead?
Hugo Nijkamp (48:18):
We learned to look around us, because the world is
changing all the time and onthat journey that you start in
the beginning, you find out likeyeah, things are changing, you
know, fundamentally changing.
You need to look around and oneof the issues that we have to
do is there are a number ofthings happening Climate change,
and that is more stormy andunusual weather environment
(48:42):
which could affect shipping.
There's the energy transition,which is alternative energy,
which results in wind farms atsea, but also the whole of the
shipping industry now investinginto alternative fuels and there
are transition fuels in themeantime.
So that is also where we areinvesting into Sea Alarm to
(49:03):
actually study that, and we dida European project to also look
at that.
But it also reflects back towildlife response and wildlife
response with that Because, onthe one hand, the energy
transition takes decades.
We want to do it very fast, butyou can see it runs into all
kinds of difficulties by whichthe timeline is unsure, but
(49:24):
there's a lot of politicalpressure and a lot of motivation
also in society to go that way.
So energy transition ishappening.
But if we look at the marineenvironment and the marine
wildlife, what are the new risksfor wildlife?
On the one hand you can say,well, oil is still around and it
will be still around fordecades because the ship owners
(49:45):
need to keep the current vesselsgoing and that needs still oil.
So oil is being transported.
So the risks are still there.
The fuel is still based on oil,even if it's alternative fuels.
It is now low sulfur oil orvery low self oil, and we've
studied this.
We are following that very witha lot of interest.
(50:05):
But the behavior of the newintermediate fuels are different
from the classical fuels.
That means that also theequipment doesn't work as you
would like to, so there's a needto look at it through it.
But it also means that in areal incident with those fuels
you know you might not be ableto stop the oil from going into
the wildlife areas and that oilwill have similar effects, you
(50:29):
know the same effect as the oldoil.
That way you can see that therisk relatively is increasing.
Then you've got the realalternative fuels like hydrogen,
methanol and biofuels,everything that is now coming on
the market.
Those come with different riskswhere you can say, well, yeah,
(50:50):
there are risks and those risksare always looked at as risks to
humans.
But the same risk for humans isalso for the animals.
That's the same.
Risk for humans is also for theanimals.
That's the same.
So we need to, as a wildliferesponse community, we have to
migrate our knowledge with thosethings, and it requires
(51:10):
research.
You know what are the effects?
Well, we have this conferenceeffects of oil on animals.
Yeah, oiled wildlife Great,fantastic, for decades.
But that terminology needs tobe widened.
It's pollution effects onwildlife.
That is the new for the decadesto come.
That's one part, and climatechange also leads to shifts into
(51:30):
where animals are, the species.
They might also be a bit moreat risk because they also, as a
population, are more vulnerable,and so the quality of the
response needs to also be there.
The importance of wildliferesponse preparedness is only
increasing, but we need tomigrate with that.
The other thing that we need todo in the SLA with the members
(51:51):
is to define and put in placethe next step providing a
response.
Because what is now in the SLAis the assessment Is the
response feasible, what ishappening and if it is feasible,
what is needed.
And that is where theassessment stops.
But the logical thing next isokay, we should respond, but
(52:14):
that needs also a furtherstructural embedding of how does
that transition go.
And I find it urgent becauseit's fantastic that we have the
GOWRS, but we also have thatexpertise at tier three level.
But what we need to explore isalso how effective can you be as
a tier three responseorganization if you're landing
(52:35):
in a country that is notprepared and on top of it,
mobilized by a company that isrelatively not and on top of it
mobilized by a company that isrelatively not as prepared for
wildlife as you would like tohave?
What can we do?
That is a serious discussionand it goes two ways that on the
one hand, we need to look atthe three organizations.
How, harry Potter can we be?
How can we make things happenin short time?
(52:58):
At which scale?
Because it's scale that isimportant.
We can always make thingshappen in short time.
At which scale?
Because it's scale that isimportant.
We can always make thingshappen.
But which scale can we actuallymake things happen.
So the Bow jubail 500, I don'tsay it's easy, but you can say
it's doable because you have theinfrastructure and the
capability.
But if you have to do that in Idon't know which country which
(53:18):
is not prepared, you don't havethe contractor that builds
temporary facility, you don'thave the authorities that are
buying in on it.
You don't have this.
All I think are empty gaps.
And then you come in as a tierthree, like, oh, that's a good
idea, you know?
Yeah, now how how big is thenthe facility and what are you
going to do with the otheranimals?
That goes into all kind ofthings.
(53:40):
That also you need to talk withthe local entities, because
it's about what can you do withan animal that you cannot treat.
You know euthanasia, that isnot in all cultures a
straightforward thing, and soall these things are important
to realize.
Paul Kelway (54:04):
Thank you for listening to the Response Force
Multiplier from OSRL.
Please like and subscribewherever you get your podcasts,
and stay tuned for more episodesas we continue to explore key
issues in emergency response andcrisis management.
For more information, head tooilspillresponse.
com.
See you soon.
Popular Podcasts
Dateline NBC
Current and classic episodes, featuring compelling true-crime mysteries, powerful documentaries and in-depth investigations. Special Summer Offer: Exclusively on Apple Podcasts, try our Dateline Premium subscription completely free for one month! With Dateline Premium, you get every episode ad-free plus exclusive bonus content.
The Breakfast Club
The World's Most Dangerous Morning Show, The Breakfast Club, With DJ Envy, Jess Hilarious, And Charlamagne Tha God!
Crime Junkie
Does hearing about a true crime case always leave you scouring the internet for the truth behind the story? Dive into your next mystery with Crime Junkie. Every Monday, join your host Ashley Flowers as she unravels all the details of infamous and underreported true crime cases with her best friend Brit Prawat. From cold cases to missing persons and heroes in our community who seek justice, Crime Junkie is your destination for theories and stories you won’t hear anywhere else. Whether you're a seasoned true crime enthusiast or new to the genre, you'll find yourself on the edge of your seat awaiting a new episode every Monday. If you can never get enough true crime... Congratulations, you’ve found your people. Follow to join a community of Crime Junkies! Crime Junkie is presented by audiochuck Media Company.