Family, colleague, and expert react to University of Alberta's investigation report
The University of Alberta’s internal investigation into the August 2023 death of Arctic researcher, Maya Bhatia, has come under scrutiny by family and colleagues for its limited scope and lack of site inspection.
Canadian Occupational Safety received a redacted version of the school’s investigation report through an access to information request. It is dated October 2023, two months after Bhatia was lost, and authored by Philip Stack, who was the school’s director of health, safety and environment at the time.
Bhatia died while conducting field work near Grise Fiord, Nunavut. According to the report Bhatia was flying in a helicopter with a student and the pilot when she made a last-minute decision to attempt to get a water sample from a stream on the Jakeman Glacier. Bhatia slipped, was swept away by the fast-moving water, and was believed to have been lost in a moulin — a vertical shaft that channels water deep into the glacier and empties into a lake. Bhatia wasn’t wearing crampons or equipped with any other standard safety equipment required for traversing glaciers.
The report identifies three causal factors contributing to Bhatia’s death:
- Deviation from the original field plan, which did not include glacier travel.
- Lack of appropriate glacier-specific safety equipment at the location.
- Insufficient communication, including the failure to maintain contact during fieldwork.
The investigation outlined 14 corrective actions taken by the University of Alberta aimed at improving oversight of field research, mandating more comprehensive safety planning, and enhancing communication protocols.
However, the university’s investigation was conducted without visiting the site and relied primarily on witness accounts from members of Bhatia’s field team as well as research teams from the University of Quebec at Rimouski and the University of Manitoba. It did not include interviews with the RCMP, consultation with the federal agency that provided funding and logistical support to the expedition, or engagement with independent investigators.
Internal vs. independent review
The Bhatia family has questioned whether the university’s internal process meets the standard of a thorough and transparent investigation.
“There was no ocular inspection, so how can you say you investigated?” questions Ramesh Bhatia, Maya’s father. “There has not been an independent investigation, there has not been any transparency, and there has not been any accountability.”
The report was completed without a site visit and relied exclusively on documentation and interviews provided by internal personnel and research collaborators. It was not made public and was only obtained through access-to-information requests, and informal sharing among colleagues. The family says it was shared with them, but only after a discussion about a non-disclosure agreement, which they rejected.
Incident investigation expert: Sufficient, but limited
Dylan Short, is the managing director of The Redlands Group. He is a health and safety consultant and experienced incident investigator. He reviewed the university’s report at the request of Canadian Occupational Safety. While he believes the university fulfilled its internal responsibilities, he notes gaps in the broader investigative framework.
“From the University of Alberta’s perspective, I do think they did a sufficient job,” Short says. “It may not feel satisfactory but given the remoteness of Grise Fiord and the timing of wildfires across the North, I can understand why they did not travel to the site.” Alberta and the Northwest Territories experienced widespread wildfires in the summer of 2023.
Short points out the university had access to photographs, interviews, and documentation that informed the report’s findings. However, he questions the absence of broader coordination between the Workplace Safety and Compensation Commission (WSCC), which is the regulator in Nunavut and the Northwest Territories, and other parties connected to the incident.
“I’m surprised there were no RCMP interviews, no consultation with the Polar Continental Shelf Program, no ground assessment by the [territorial regulator]. That’s what’s really missing here.”
The WSCC acknowledged it did not conduct an independent investigation, despite initially indicating that it would.
Questions from within the research team
One of the field team leaders who was present during the 2023 incident is also raising concerns. David Didier was a colleague of Bhatia. He leads the research team from the University of Quebec at Rimouski and provided an extensive witness statement. He says the university did not consult with him during the investigation and has not conducted any ground-level review of the site.
“They just relied on our statement. No one else went to the glacier. No one walked the stream. There was no serious attempt to understand what happened on the ground,” says Didier.
He adds that when the research group returned to the site in 2024, their own fieldwork plans were altered so that helicopter time could be used to revisit the area where Bhatia was last seen.
“If this had happened in the South, there would have been a full ground investigation,” says Didier.
Unconfirmed circumstances
A key assumption in the university’s findings — that Bhatia’s body was lost in a moulin — has not been independently verified. Didier, who attempted to locate Bhatia in the minutes and hours after the incident, remains uncertain about that conclusion.
When Bhatia was lost, two people were with her, a student and the helicopter pilot. In their statements, they say they lost sight of Bhatia, and presumed her body reached the moulin, located about 2.4 kilometres from where she first slipped into the stream.
“I didn’t seen her fall in the moulin... I don’t think anyone really has,” says Didier. “It’s possible her body is still on the surface, stuck in a snowbank or further down the stream. But no one’s looked. That’s never been done.”
The investigation report notes the team lacked specialized glacier rescue equipment at the time of the incident. It states critical safety gear was stored in Resolute Bay, over 400 km from the worksite.
Didier further notes that, to date, no formal recovery effort or targeted ground search has been undertaken.
Institutional response
The University of Alberta was contacted for comment, but as of publication, it had not provided an attributable response.
The Polar Continental Shelf Program (PCSP), a federal agency that provides funding and logistical support for Arctic research in Canada, was also contacted for comment, and said it would need more time to provide a response.
Canadian Occupational Safety has also reached out to the office of the Minister responsible for the WSCC, Pamela Gross.
Broader implications
Bhatia’s death has raised questions about how Arctic research expeditions are planned, monitored, and supported. Unlike international institutions such as the British Antarctic Survey and NASA, which enforce strict safety standards and guide-to-researcher ratios, there is no centralized oversight body governing Canadian Arctic research operations.
In upcoming articles Canadian Occupational Safety will explore gaps in field safety oversight for Arctic research, the role of federal agencies such as the Polar Continental Shelf Program, and the family’s push for greater accountability.
