Once again, DFO shows how well they can estimate. Sad.

Hello Rover. I think you are bang on with your last post. imo dfo does a pretty good job forecasting returns with the tools available.
There seems to be a gap in knowledge with the outmigration and transition to sea phase for salmonids. I personally observed coast wide depopulation of macro invertebrates which explains the low s/h productivity. There is no recognition of this yet. Do you know of any long term plankton sampling that could be used to compare with sockeye and pink abundance trends? I've tried googling it and keep getting lost in many other interesting reports that don't have consistent or recent data. After a couple hours of searching and reading my back is sore and frustration kicks in. I am curious to know if there was healthy abundance of plankton flowing down the Thompson and Fraser during the out migration years of this years returns? If you or anyone else knows of this info please direct me to it. Thank you.

Not sure if you have been to this website but it is choked full of info. Don't know if it will help you but it's has a bunch of info that may give you some leads. I spent many hours reading so I could get up to speed on the Thompson.
https://www.fraserbasin.bc.ca/tr.html
 
Thanks GLG,
Couldn't find any info of plankton densities or abundance trends in that site. It seemed to be more of an advertisement than actual scientific document. Lots of hype. Maybe I missed a link there??
What I am looking into is proof that healthy water and ecology was flowing down the Fraser or Thompson rivers during the out migration years of this years dismal brood return? My inspections of the Thompson indicated stream inverts were extremely lacking. What about plankton??
 
Here is one for next year.

Note the last paragraph.


BRISTOL BAY, Alaska (KTUU) -
The Alaska Department of Fish and Game is forecasting another bumper year for sockeye salmon in 2018. An expected 51 million sockeye could return, with 37 million set aside for commercial fishing. "All systems are expected to meet their spawning escapement goals," wrote the ADF&G in a news release.

The bumper forecast comes amidst debate about whether to open the controversial Pebble Mine, a move that supporters say would bring growth and economic activity to the region. Detractors say the mine would harm the profitable watershed.

ADF&G says size of the predicted run is "18% greater than the most recent 10-year average Bristol Bay total runs." The predicted 51 million returning sockeye would also be 41 percent greater than the long-term mean of 33.78 million fish. There is a predicted escapement of 12.20 million sockeye.

Furthermore, a total harvest of nearly 40 million fish would be 87 percent greater than the long-term average of 20.85 million fish. ADF&G says that average was recorded from 1963 until now.

The lower end of the forecast range would be 40.68 million while the higher end of the forecast would see 61.88 million sockeye return, says ADF&G.

ADF&G says due to the unpredictability of the salmon run, the department has incorrectly predicted the sockeye run in the past. “Since 2001, our forecasts have, on average, under-forecast the run by 11%,” the department wrote
 
How come they can predict within 11%. And then they under estimated?
 
How *** Alaska Sockeye are doing so much better than our Fraser River Sockeye?

There are various theories, but one involves that Sockeye in the Fraser are at the southern edge of their range, and with warming, particularly of the Fraser and lakes that the sockeye rear in, they may just not be able to survive this far south for much longer. On the other hand the range is extending North, and the stocks in the Bristol bay area are now in the "sweet spot" for sockeye survival. An overview of warming effects on pacific salmon is presented here.

http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Special Publications/LRMP_Synthesis.pdf
 
There are some streams on the Olympic Peninsula (WA State) where logging had destroyed the habitat & the fish runs. Loss of the influence on water chemistry the decaying spawned-out Salmon played caused the streams to become sterile; incapable of support aquatic life.
 
There are various accepted theories but then there are also facts that could be referred to. Looks like stream chemistry had been dabbled into down in Idaho. "death by a thousand cuts" has been observed before smolts ever reach the ocean. Wonder if the there same chemistry issues could be happening in the Fraser watershed?

http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/letters-from-the-west/article185037743.html
i believe you have been looking for information regarding ocean Acidification.
Hakai Institute has been looking at this. hope this helps: https://marinesurvivalproject.com/research_activity/list/additional-bottom-projects/

In the summer of 2016 the Hakai Institute began a partnership with the Pacific Salmon Foundation’s Citizen Science (PSF-CZ) program to evaluate the potential for ocean acidification in the Strait of Georgia. Ocean acidification is the process of increasing the ocean’s level of acidity, termed its “pH”, and is caused by increasing amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere dissolving into the ocean.

The effect of changing ocean pH on marine life differs widely between species and currently little information is available about the long-term consequences of such change on coastal environments. The seawater chemistry in coastal settings can also vary widely between nearby areas and over short timescales, adding complexity to the situation. The Hakai Institute and PSF are addressing this shortcoming in knowledge by combining their abilities to collect water samples and make seawater carbon dioxide measurements at locations throughout the northern Strait of Georgia (Figure 1). Scientists from Hakai’s Ocean Acidification Program will then use the measurements to determine how carbon dioxide behaves in the Strait of Georgia and to investigate the potential of ocean acidification in the region..........................................................................................
 
There are some streams on the Olympic Peninsula (WA State) where logging had destroyed the habitat & the fish runs. Loss of the influence on water chemistry the decaying spawned-out Salmon played caused the streams to become sterile; incapable of support aquatic life.
There are some streams on the Olympic Peninsula (WA State) where logging had destroyed the habitat & the fish runs. Loss of the influence on water chemistry the decaying spawned-out Salmon played caused the streams to become sterile; incapable of support aquatic life.

The also many streams on the B.C. coast that haven't been logged and have become sterile. In contrast there is a few that are still supporting stable ecology even though the valley's have been raped by logging for many years. This varied effect is even in the same inlets with streams only a few miles from each other. Just like fish farms, logging has been blamed for loss of fish populations because it is there, can be seen and it is solicited. In fact there are many coastal streams without logging or fish farms on migratory routes that have suffered the losses in fish populations. I have flipped thru the "Carnation creek" study many times. This is the most complete study of nutrient leaching/via logging in B.C. waters. As the valley was logged the stream chemistry was monitored for nutrient levels and many other characteristics. From what I remember it was assumed the logging allowed the nutrients to be released from the soils. Interestingly they never did apply the changing chemistry of the input water source, (rain). During the time of the study acid rain was showering the earth. Not just Carnation creek was going thru a water softening era so were all other streams all across the continent. Logging may allow movements of substrates increase erosion or weathering but not the main factor controlling chemistry. What Logging does do is lower a streams ability to buffer the rain water which can be quite toxic.
I also believe acid precipitation and geology has far more influence on stream chemistry than deposited salmon carcasses in the lower reaches. I could post a bunch of studies but have done that in the past and it was blown off.
 
Not to defend logging - but my understanding is that it can and usually dramatically change the hydrograph (dependent upon amount of logging) so that trees and soils do not hold and trickle the water out into the creek. The hydrographic peaks (both lows and highs) are accentuated from rainfall. Other WQ parameters would be affected as well (temps, pH, DOC, etc.)

If they did not deactivate properly (and many watersheds logged in the early 80s before the FPC came-in are not) - slope failures and landslides happen like 8-15 years after the logging - when the roots rot and let go. If that happens - it goes from a coho creek w pools - to a pink/chum one with infilled pools and braided channels & dewatering. Eventually, it starts to recover...

However, as long as riparian bank stability is maintained and not contributing to braided channels, meandering and sediment pulses (sometimes it is - sometimes not) - the extra light penetration into the creek through canopy thinning and opening - as well as the deciduous leaf litter from the alder growth - can be beneficial to instream production.

many factors to consider...
 
Bones, I am looking for information in freshwater ecology trends. As I have witnessed total depopulation of freshwater inverts over the last twenty years, (now rebuilding), I have noticed a lack of scientific attention to fresh water chemistry. Everything is blamed on the old go to excuses "clear cut logging", "fish farms" and "ocean survival". Well the downward trend of salmonid populations was preceeded by an ignored collapse of invertebrate populations in fresh water.

The words "ocean acidification" are an extreme exaggeration of facts designed to arouse fear and attention. I can't imagine the ocean ever getting near a ph of less than 7 other than where influenced from fresh water or volcanic vents. In fact there are far greater changes in f/w ph and instances of acidic conditions all the time then anywhere in the ocean.

A question for you or anyone. If rising co2 levels are acidifying or lowering the ph levels of the oceans than how could it be possible for the rain ph to be continuously rise over the last decade?
 
The words "ocean acidification" are an extreme exaggeration of facts designed to arouse fear and attention. I can't imagine the ocean ever getting near a ph of less than 7 other than where influenced from fresh water or volcanic vents. In fact there are far greater changes in f/w ph and instances of acidic conditions all the time then anywhere in the ocean. ?

I would disagree with that. I recall reading that the Commercial Oyster farms on the east coast of VI are now having to raise the early stages of baby oysters elsewhere as the local water is now too acid for them to form shells when they are very small. In that regard BC may well be the canary in the coal mine. I have wondered if all that fresh water pumped into the strait by the Fraser and somewhat trapped by what is the wall that is Vancouver Island is causing this problem to occur earlier here than other locations on the planet.
 
Bones, I am looking for information in freshwater ecology trends. As I have witnessed total depopulation of freshwater inverts over the last twenty years, (now rebuilding
Sorry, was just reading some stuff thought id pass it along, never much written on the subject. You could email them and ask if its been looked at and if there I any reading to be had.
 
I would disagree with that. I recall reading that the Commercial Oyster farms on the east coast of VI are now having to raise the early stages of baby oysters elsewhere as the local water is now too acid for them to form shells when they are very small. In that regard BC may well be the canary in the coal mine. I have wondered if all that fresh water pumped into the strait by the Fraser and somewhat trapped by what is the wall that is Vancouver Island is causing this problem to occur earlier here than other locations on the planet.

Yes you nailed it! The influence of fresh water is why the inside waters suffered ph drop not the acidifying ocean polluting the strait. Half of B.C. drains into the Georgia strait. When low ph fresh water runs down into the confined basin of the strait it will obviously adjust the ph and alkalinity of the ocean f/w mix solution that is lingering in the strait. This will all be varied by ph of rain, or snow melt and stream volumes.
 
Quite possibly volcanic vents off the Washington coast.
As convincing of a report that is it contradicts present facts of rain chemistry. Even though co2 levels have been climbing rain ph has been rising. Now rain drops have far more surface area per volume than oceans and fall thru this higher concentrated co2 air. How could it be possible that aptmospheric co2 is lowering ocean ph but not rain?
 
Quite possibly volcanic vents off the Washington coast.
As convincing of a report that is it contradicts present facts of rain chemistry. Even though co2 levels have been climbing rain ph has been rising. Now rain drops have far more surface area per volume than oceans and fall thru this higher concentrated co2 air. How could it be possible that aptmospheric co2 is lowering ocean ph but not rain?

The article claims the lower pH seawater on the near coast is coming from upwellings of water that absorbed the CO2 decades ago. Rainwater falling now would have no correlation with the Ocean acididty if this is the case. Also seawater has biological organisms which absorb CO2, but also release it when they die and are degraded by bacterial processes. Utilization of Co2 by plankton reduces the CO2 concentration and allowing more absorption at the Ocean surface. The oceans are big, a lot of wave and surf action for CO2 to be absorbed.
 
Yes I read that part of the upwelling water that was decades old. The average ph of rain water two decades ago was ten times more acidic than it is now. So if the co2 level in the upwelling ocean water was indeed caused from co2 levels decades ago then would the rain ph decades ago not follow a same pattern? The biological organisms you mention in sea water do also exist in fresh water but in different species adapted to f/w. That along with decomposing organic sediments should give f/w all the opportunity to receive equal co2 input form organic cycles. Well the ph and alkalinity is on the rise in fresh water environments all across the continent. It doesn't make sense that surface fresh waters have been rising in ph while the co2 levels rise but the oceans do not. Surface water in streams and lakes have far more available surface area to volume ratios from waves and waterfalls by far than oceans have with waves yet are not following the same ph trend.

If they do end up following the same trend then we should be looking at rising ocean ph levels in the near future because co2 is now being absorbed into the air rather than being stored in the planet's waters.

As I read the science and test the waters myself it is indicating there are other elements causing the ph changes other than co2 levels in the air.
 
Back
Top