Salmon can adapt to warmer environment, study says

[shuswap]

Admittedly, reporters cherry-pick sometimes the more memorable quotes while neglecting to print others. It may be that Farrell already spoke about the seriousness of the issues and it wasn't reported in that news article. But I think the news article left a mistaken impression on the public that there was an easy fix to the serious issue of climate change and elevated water temperatures - using females with larger eggs in broodstock and using hatcheries to maintain the wild populations.

That is a good point and something that commonly happens when the media reports the news. Farrell could have said other things but the reporter could have omitted them. This is why I take news media stories regarding salmon in BC with a grain of salt. The public thinks they are getting the whole story but most of the time they are not. Sorry to be the bearer of bad news, Joe Public. It’s not so much what is said in the story – it’s more about what is missing for context.

It appeared Farrell agreed with those suggestions, without providing any caveats or cautions that I am sure he would have known about. I still take issue with that. He should have known better, and done a better job communicating these issues.

I think you may be reading too much into the story, Agent. If you are really that curious just contact the guy (see attached link). Just because it’s not in the story shouldn’t imply that people like Farrell are not concerned. Remember it’s a news story that is finite in length. It’s not as if he was being questioned at a judicial inquiry (he was an expert witness along with Miller explaining genomics). Again, people like Farrell, Hinch, Cooke, Miller and Clarke are leaders in Pacific Salmon physiology research. They don’t have a crystal ball but the research this team has done has revolutionize how we view the impacts of water temperatures and flows on Pacific Salmon physiology. However, when you look at what was predicted and what returned to the spawning grounds for Fraser Sockeye last year during a period of prolonged, extreme water temperatures it really presents more questions than answers. Huge enroute loss didn’t materialize. So, while these researchers do the best they can even they probably would admit that there are things we still need to learn.
http://people.landfood.ubc.ca/anthony.farrell/

Both you and Dave come from a hatchery background, Shuswap. Correct?

Worked at a few a long time ago, but I never really like the walk-in freezer and the alarms freaked me out.

I do agree that hatcheries (i.e. stock assistance) are 1 component (and only but 1) - of a strategy to support/recover populations at risk. And like any tool - it needs to be used appropriately and only for as long as required - and honed. It is not a one-stop-shops-all response - which is why I was critical of the quotes attributed to Farrell, and the general "we got it all solved" assertions - w/o those caveats. I do agree with short-term stock assistance WHILE the other stressors are being worked on. In any "emergency" - you do what you have to do - but even in Hospitals - there is a recovery ward and a plan to rehabilitate the victim.

While I don’t necessarily disagree with everything you are saying, hatcheries are not going to go away as long as anglers on this board want to have opportunity to catch salmon. I just don't see it happening especially if there is economic benefit of anglers catching hatchery salmon. When you have businesses dependent on catching fish it is not likely hatcheries are going away any time soon. Working on other stressors is kind of pie-in-the-sky, in my opinion. We can likely identify all the stressors, but the biggest one, being climate change, is not likely to be solved in my or your lifetime. The cold hard fact is that some stocks need help right now and are not going to wait while we work on other stressors. Since the 80s many federal hatcheries were closed and not many (if any) have been built since so it’s not as if this is seen as the one-stop-response, in my opinion. Hatcheries do serve an important purpose in the coded wire tag program because being able to get enough wild Coho or Chinook to tag to make it worthwhile is very difficult – not just the numbers but the environmental conditions involved in capturing them during the spring for marking. Indicator stocks are important tools and CWTs are a large part of that.

 

[agentaqua]

Couldn't agree more with what you wrote, Shuswap.

 

[agentaqua]

Interesting thread started by reelfast at: http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/showthread.php?28627-US-hatchery-reform-in-the-PNW

Thank you for that reelfast!

The link he gave about US hatchery reform at: http://www.hatcheryreform.us/hrp/welcome_show.action
leads back into the discussion early on this thread. The subsections on:

Climate change: http://www.hatcheryreform.us/hrp_do.../4_appendix_a_3_effects_of_climate_change.pdf

Inbreeding: http://www.hatcheryreform.us/hrp_do...ppendix_a_1_interbreeding_fitness_effects.pdf

and Conclusions/Recommendations seem most pertinent to this discussion: http://www.hatcheryreform.us/hrp_do.../2_conclusions_principles_recommendations.pdf

p.1:"The HSRG concluded that hatcheries play an important role in the management of salmon and steelhead populations in the Columbia River Basin. Nevertheless, the traditional practice of replacing natural populations with hatchery fish to mitigate for habitat loss and mortality due to hydroelectric dams is not consistent with today’s conservation principles and scientific knowledge. Hatchery fish cannot replace lost habitat or the natural populations that rely on that habitat. Therefore, hatchery programs must be viewed not as surrogates or replacements for lost habitat, but as tools that can be managed as part of a coordinated strategy to meet watershed or regional resource goals, in concert with actions affecting habitat, harvest rates, water allocation and other important components of the human environment".

This is what I have been expressing concerns about - the caveats I mentioned that should have been responsibly communicated in the news article, but weren't:

p.5:"To be successful, hatcheries should be used as part of a comprehensive strategy where habitat, hatchery management and harvest are coordinated to best meet resource management goals that are defined for each population in the watershed. Hatcheries are by their very nature a compromise—a balancing of benefits and risks to the target population, other populations, and the natural and human environment affected by the hatchery program. Use of a hatchery program is appropriate when benefits significantly outweigh the risks and when the benefit/risk mix from the program is more favorable than the benefits and risks associated with non-hatchery strategies for meeting the same goals.".

 

[agentaqua]

Thank you for the honest and respectful response.
I am negligent as well as I assumed you knew about Farrell’s involvement in this stuff. I agree with you that climate change leading to warming Fraser River (and of course all others) is a huge problem for fish, especially sockeye, and we may well see huge mortalities on the Fraser this summer. Water levels are dropping fast and temperatures are rising faster, already nearly 2° C higher than normal for this date. If this weather pattern continues, if there are no significant rainfall events in the Thompson area, and if the Chilko and Shuswap components, the largest expected this year, enter the river a bit earlier and temperatures are still high ie 19-20°, many will die before reaching their spawning areas. I know, lots of ifs but all indications are it will not favor upstream migrating sockeye.

Another example is my back yard river, the Chilliwack. It’s mid July and dropping like a stone as the snowpack is virtually gone; come September this river will be large creek and that will impact rearing wild salmonids. Thank god for some controlled flow off channel rearing areas on this system.

http://www.timescolonist.com/news/l...hreatening-fish-mill-and-summer-fun-1.1207743

Low water in Cowichan River threatening fish, mill and summer fun
SANDRA MCCULLOCH / TIMES COLONIST
JULY 15, 2014 10:09 PM

The Cowichan River is getting so low there’s talk of pumping water over the weir at Cowichan Lake just to keep enough water downstream for spawning salmon, industry and a myriad of water users.

The water flow in the river over the last few weeks has dropped to five cubic metres per second from seven.

“It’s the earliest that this has ever happened,” said Rodger Hunter, co-ordinator of the Cowichan Watershed Board on Tuesday.

The reasons behind the dwindling flow “isn’t rocket science — it’s global warming biting us,” he said.

“We’re looking at pumps right now and we’d probably require a permit,” Hunter said. “The longer term thing is to raise the weir — if you raise the weir, you stockpile more water in the lake and we’d be a lot better off than we are this year.”

The next step is getting design drawings and funding.

The spring and summer inflows have dropped off in recent years, with a lower snowpack in the mountains melting with a smaller-than-normal spring rainfall.

“This year, we had a particularly low snowpack and we didn’t have much rain,” which led to the current situation, Hunter said.

In July 2012, there was so much water in Cowichan Lake that water came into the river over top of the weir, which is the outlet to the Cowichan River. This year, the lake level is 36 centimetres below the top of the weir.

Salmon, trout and juvenile steelhead depend on the river to survive.

“They’re in the river year-round — the adults migrating depend on those flows, too,” he said.

Salmon begin to suffer when the flows drop as they have. Less water means the amount of habitat is decreased and the temperature rises. Volunteers are on the river helping those salmon that are stranded in pools get moved to more open areas. Then those areas get crowded, said Hunter.

Recreational tubing is affected as well. While the upper river still has good areas for tubing, the river is so shallow downstream, it makes for a bumpy ride, Hunter said. “You’re either carrying the [inner tube] or you’re bumping along,” he said.

The Catalyst pulp mill at Crofton operates the weir and also uses water from the river.

“The issue there is it’s an old mill, so making major changes to gain significant efficiencies to water use is going to be a very costly initiative,” he said.

On the other hand, low water flows may force the mill to close temporarily and that would be costly for the mill and its 600 employees, Hunter said.

Calls to Catalyst were not returned Tuesday but on its website, the company says it collaborates closely with regulatory authorities regarding weir operation, and it engages with local stakeholders on water management through its involvement with the Cowichan Watershed Board.

There are two sewage outfalls that empty in the river, so less water also makes the contamination more concentrated. North Cowichan is working with Health Canada, Cowichan Tribes and Island Health to deal with the potential for problems.

There is a connection between the groundwater and the river, and a study is looking at the relationship.

Cowichan Valley residents are becoming more aware of the need for water conservation.

The chinook population had been gradually recovering but these kinds of hard years can set things back, he said.

“It’s not a great situation. If you have healthy fish going out into a changing ocean, they survive much better in that more limited environment.

“The nice thing about the Cowichan is we’ve got problems, but we’ve got solutions. This problem is preventable.”

smcculloch@timescolonist.com

© Copyright Times Colonist

- See more at: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/l...and-summer-fun-1.1207743#sthash.3TRBlYwl.dpuf

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.nature.com/ncomms/2014/140624/ncomms5252/full/ncomms5252.html

NATURE COMMUNICATIONS | ARTICLE
Print
Email
Share/bookmark
Atlantic salmon show capability for cardiac acclimation to warm temperatures

Katja Anttila, Christine S. Couturier, Øyvind Øverli, Arild Johnsen, Gunnhild Marthinsen, Göran E. Nilsson & Anthony P. Farrell
AffiliationsContributionsCorresponding author
Nature Communications 5, Article number: 4252 doi:10.1038/ncomms5252
Received 06 May 2014 Accepted 28 May 2014 Published 24 June 2014
Article tools
Citation
Reprints
Rights & permissions
Article metrics
Abstract
Abstract• References• Author information
Increases in environmental temperature predicted to result from global warming have direct effects on performance of ectotherms. Moreover, cardiac function has been observed to limit the tolerance to high temperatures. Here we show that two wild populations of Atlantic salmon originating from northern and southern extremes of its European distribution have strikingly similar cardiac responses to acute warming when acclimated to common temperatures, despite different local environments. Although cardiac collapse starts at 21–23 °C with a maximum heart rate of ~\n150 beats per min (bpm) for 12 °C-acclimated fish, acclimation to 20 °C considerably raises this temperature (27.5 °C) and maximum heart rate (~\n200 bpm). Only minor population differences exist and these are consistent with the warmer habitat of the southern population. We demonstrate that the considerable cardiac plasticity discovered for Atlantic salmon is largely independent of natural habitat, and we propose that observed cardiac plasticity may aid salmon to cope with global warming