wildmanyeah
Crew Member
I am not saying fish farms don't have an impact im just saying there removal is unlikely to reverse the decline in salmon we are seeing.
Then in your mind and according to you, in the mind of Dr. Carl Walters , the Open Net Pen controversy is settled.DR Carl Walters in the SFI conference said there is no correlation in the decline of salmon with fish farms. That the decline started happening long before fish farms were present.
Or the billions of "ranched" salmon up north of us in Alaska , sold as "wild caught".......cricketsThis is no different then the commercial fishing industry who puts a portion of their sales into the eat wild salmon campaign.
It will not change the driving forces causing salmon declines. What it's more likely to do is increase wild salmon prices. That will put even more harvest pressure on our stocks.Then in your mind and according to you, in the mind of Dr. Carl Walters , the Open Net Pen controversy is settled.
Removing Fish Farms will not contribute to non Fish Farm salmon survival? Yes or No AND
No Fish Farm closures are coming and expansion can continue because non fish farm salmon are heading to extinction anyway.
Actually witw, wildmanyeah has already mentioned how farmed salmon are helping wild stocks … if farmed salmon was not available for the general population to purchase, the poaching on the Fraser and tribs would be far worse than it is now.and open net fish farms with the documented pollution, viruses, parasites, pesticides and incidental in net bycatch, are not contributing to the decline of salmon? Next someone will be saying that net pen salmon farms are helping wild salmon populations.
I think the assertion that framed salmon is helping decrease the poaching on the Fraser is an angle that even the most belligerent of FF spokespersons have not dared try yet.
Canada contemplating new Aquaculture Act; DFO leading public consultations
Canada contemplating new Aquaculture Act; DFO leading public consultations | SaltWire
They may have different views but aquaculture's fans and foes agree on one thing, the need for federal legislation specific to fish-farming. The industry ...www.journalpioneer.com
Ya - I never believed the election promise neither, WMY - as you know...
Perhaps the Broughton FN Bands can show the leadership required by forgoing a few jobs inspiring the Lower Fraser FN Bands to ban gillnetting in the Lower Fraser so the Upper Fraser FN Bands can put a few Wild Salmon on the dinner table again and a process can start where there can be some Wild Fish for everyone including Sporties and Commies.The question is will these bands that support or apose salmon farms be elected band government, or non elected hereditary leaders, or just more than one individual local indigenous persons say on the matter?
DR Carl Walters in the SFI conference said there is no correlation in the decline of salmon with fish farms. That the decline started happening long before fish farms were present.
Total abundance of Fraser River sockeye has increased steadily from less than 5 million in the 1960s to a peak of over 23 million in 1993, although there are large variations in cycle line abundance. Figure 6 shows a stacked plot of escapement (black area), catch (gray shaded area) and the corresponding exploitation rate (solid line). The upper edge of the gray shaded area shows total returning adults (i.e. catch + escapement). Before rebuilding began in 1990, average abundance was 6.6 million with exploitation rates above 70% on most years and frequently over 80%. In the 12 years since the start of the rebuilding strategy (1990-2001), average exploitation rates have been reduced to 55% and the total abundance of Fraser River sockeye has nearly doubled to 11.1 million (Table 2). Average catches have also increased to over 7 million and spawner abundance has more than doubled to 3.4 million (Figure 6). However, total abundance of Fraser River sockeye has declined from the peak in 1993. This has been due in part to declining productivity of summer run stocks (Figure 7) and high mortality affecting Late run stocks. Since 1995, management measures put in place to protect stocks in the Late run aggregate have further reduced average exploitation rates to 41%, with a low of 15% in 1999. Average catches since 1995 have also decreased substantially to 3.3 million including the lowest catch on record of less than 600,000 in 1999. Dramatic reductions in exploitation rates have resulted in the largest escapements on record on several cycle lines.I am not saying fish farms don't have an impact im just saying there removal is unlikely to reverse the decline in salmon we are seeing.
Yup it is a deal made with the devil in regards to the benefits of net pen salmon farms that will come back to bite us in the butt for those that care about wild salmon populations. If it were land based salmon farms we were talking about I would agree with you more - but NOT net pen farms for all the disease, pollution, pesticides, and incidental in pen bycatch of other fish species (e.g. herring and wild salmon). The are definitely NOT helping increase wild salmon populations - they are another nail in the coffin. Can't get these salmon farms on the land fast enough in my opinion!Actually witw, wildmanyeah has already mentioned how farmed salmon are helping wild stocks … if farmed salmon was not available for the general population to purchase, the poaching on the Fraser and tribs would be far worse than it is now.
Consider, early Fraser chinook from the Albion test fishery sells out at $50 lb. There will be a huge black market demand for salmon if wild are only available.