Salmon Extinction

Red Monster

Well-Known Member
Thursday » December 20 » 2007

B.C. wild salmon in danger of extinction

Stephen Hume
Vancouver Sun


Thursday, December 20, 2007


Five years ago, a senior fisheries biologist in Galway, Ireland, warned what lay ahead for British Columbia's wild salmon: Infestations of sea lice around fish farms followed by a collapse of wild stocks wherever baby salmon migrated through concentrations of the parasites.

Dr. Greg Forde was not a radical environmentalist, as the aquaculture industry routinely characterizes critics. He worked for Ireland's western regional fisheries board, struggling to cope with a collapse of wild stocks in a sea lice-infestation that emerged after fish farms came to that coast.

More than stocks collapsed. The sport fishing industry, a major revenue producer there -- as in B.C. -- was rocked to its foundations as game fish dwindled.

"The awful thing is about lessons not learned," Forde told me back then. "It's all déjà vu. It's the most frustrating thing to hear what's happened here has now happened in B.C."

His colleague, Seamus Hartigan, in charge of managing the Galway River salmon fishery, echoed Forde's sentiments. "It happened in Norway for years and we didn't pay any attention," Hartigan said. "It's happened in Ireland and you [in B.C.] are not paying attention. Do you want to learn by other people's mistakes or do you want to learn by your own mistakes?

"Norway had some of the best rivers in the world for the production of massive salmon -- they are just gone," Hartigan said. "Why couldn't we learn from that? Why can't you learn from us? Is the B.C. government willing to make a place in the scheme of things for indigenous species?"

The five-year-old question is poignant considering the gloomy forecast for the fate of pink salmon on the province's mid-coast in a new study reported last week by Scott Simpson. It argues that if sea lice infestations associated with fish farms on migration routes continue, pink salmon stocks on the mid-coast can be expected to collapse into localized extinctions.

Sounds like a 2007 assessment in Ireland which warns that if prized sea trout stocks are not to be lost, "the elimination of sea lice on and in the vicinity of marine salmon farms must be a constant priority."

The B.C. study, published in the journal Science, adds to Scottish research which found sea lice from fish farms killed up to 50 per cent of migrating smolts and it strengthens the argument that sea lice propagated in net pens here kill baby pinks the same way.

A paper published last year in the North American Journal of Fisheries Management found that dying pink salmon smolts carried twice the load of blood-sucking sea lice as healthy fish.

The self-interested aquaculture industry dismisses this research as biased. The federal department of fisheries and oceans, mandated to protect wild stocks while promoting aquaculture, protests that the studies "overstate" risks. Our provincial government, paralyzed by ideology, ignores the problem even as its own legislature committee on sustainable aquaculture advises otherwise.

Let's be clear. If the extinctions forecast by this new study take place as predicted, it will be an ecological catastrophe for the mid-coast. Pink runs sustain bears, killer whales, eagles, seals, sea lions and trout. Their decaying bodies fertilize riparian forests and maintain the nutrient levels for aquatic plants, insects, amphibians and fish in rivers.

If the pinks go, expect the chum, coho and chinook to follow, perhaps sooner than you think. Then the bears. Then the fishing lodges.

Even as plans ramp up for industrial gravel removal from the lower Fraser, preliminary stock assessments for salmon returns in 2008 suggest a dismal year for dwindling runs already ravaged by neglect, mismanagement and loss of spawning and rearing habitat.

Eight of 14 sockeye runs to the Fraser watershed are forecast to reach less than target escapement and are declining, some rapidly. Out of 12 chinook runs to the Fraser or Georgia Strait, nine fall in this category. All four such coho runs are listed as "of concern."

So here's the question for readers: Will B.C. be a better place without wild salmon?

If you think not, you'd better get organized, act like citizens in a democracy and prepare to hold politically accountable those who dither, deny and do nothing despite the warnings.

shume@islandnet.com
 
...in-fighting amongst different angling genre is no longer a valid argument with regard to the state of our fishery and it's stock. Anglers have long pointed their fingers at each other over what technic did what to the fish and which harmed them more or which did less dammage, blah, blah, blah. Fly, gear, bait, troll, jig, floss...none of that kind of finger pointing matters anymore...we have more importent issues to rectify if we wish to sustain our opportunities as anglers!

What does matter today, however, is the state of our fishery and how fast it has changed over this last decade - Now I know for sure that we can all agree upon that. Right?...and I do know that each and every ardent angler in BC, regardless of genre would love to see our so called sustainable fisheries continue to forge forth for generations upon generations to come - Would we not?? I believe we would...

After all why is it so hard for us to see what is in front of us, when we all know what we have done in our past...we know what kind of dammage over fishing in various sectors can create and we also know what we need to do to revise or rebuild what we have killed - how much or how little we put back into what we take is what we will receive as a direct result. If all we do is take, then all we are left with is very little or nothing atall in the end.

All factors add into the equation...some are stonger than others, like the sealice and other related issues created by net pen sea farms, over logging, over harvest of food sources and also what we dump into the system on a daily basis...

How much are we willing to give up? How much are we all willing to give back? How much do we need to put in to help rebuild the salmon stocks? How much time can you devote? How much money will you put in to help save the salmon? How many letters will you write? How many local meetings will you attend? what will you do to help curtail the demise of our salmon and other marine species?

All valid questions...all very important questions that need to be both asked, and answered by that of our angling public. How far are we willing to let our resource die before it is too late for anyone to save?

...I will continue to do what ever I can. I suggest that anglers band together to help rebuild our stocks...let's be creative, let's offer our imput, let's listen and think, discuss and do. "Do!"

Cheers,
RVP. ;)
 
There is a big study being done right now by the Pacific Salmon Foundation that has been looking at the Sea Lice issue from a objective view point. Unlike the recent junk report done by Morton and company which picked through the info that it wanted and completely ignored other facts. It makes good press but can hardly be considered reliable. Hopefully when the report comes out in 2008 we will have some concrete information about what is happening. Of course if it disproves Morton and company then it will be discredited and the finger pointing will start up again.
 
There have been so many studies done and it seems you can trash them all until you get the one the one that gives you the results you want. And if it does not give the results wanted then the fish farming industry needs another study. I guess when there are no wild salmon passing the farms they will be able to say it is a good thing their farms are there so there are fish for people to eat, and so what if there is a sea lice infestation on the farm there are no wild salmon to infect.
Facts are the that Norway has had their salmon runs destroyed on all rivers where fish farms are on the migration routes, Scotland and Ireland have had the same results and are now banned from putting any farms in. If this were not the case the would still be putting farms in those countries. It seems that the only location the industry wants to put farms in BC as well is on migration routes.
We in BC are now paying the price and we now read reports that fishermen in Chile are reporting significant losses in catch and returns in areas where there are fish farms.
There seems to be a underlying culture in the farming industry to destroy wild runs to create a dependance upon them for fish.
Barbender
You seem set on A. Morton and her group fudging the information. Yet you look at the list of respected scientific communities that back and publish her work and none of them are as self serving as the fish farming community. What proof have you that they fudge the results and what proof do you have that farming industry do not fudge theirs.
I can tell, you are in some way involved with the Fish Farm Industry and respect your stand, but the end of wild runs as we know it are coming and the only thing that the fish farming industry is doing is throwing more money into advertising it has nothing to do with them and that we need another study to give the results they want.
There have been suggestions of closed pens and moving sites on land but the fish farm industry cites costs. In reality it becomes a case they would rather throw out dissention than address the problem.
It seems every article we read is against farming, unless it is a paid commercial by farmers.
Here is a link to an article that is respected and not just from one source
http://www.terradaily.com/reports/F...Salmon_Populations_Toward_Extinction_999.html
 
Our government is deaf.
All they hear is Cha Ching $$$

quote:All factors add into the equation...some are stonger than others, like the sealice and other related issues created by net pen sea farms, over logging, over harvest of food sources and also what we dump into the system on a daily basis...

How much are we willing to give up? How much are we all willing to give back? How much do we need to put in to help rebuild the salmon stocks? How much time can you devote? How much money will you put in to help save the salmon? How many letters will you write? How many local meetings will you attend? what will you do to help curtail the demise of our salmon and other marine species?

I am willing to give up fish farms, over logging, over harvesting, dumping, fishing rivers and a few others.


Tips
 
RVP, you ask many good questions. I can think of few more.

How do you talk to folks who simply dismiss the mountain of evidence about the harm caused my sealice?

How do you talk to folks who describe scientific information, published in one of the world's foremost scientific journals, as "junk"?

How do you talk to folks with their heads so far their a$$e$ that they can't hear a word you're saying? [}:)]
 
Well I agree with both of you on some points. The point I am making here is that Alexandra Morton and her co author are staunch anti aquaculture activists. Not exactly what I would call unbiased research. Some of which has already been proven wrong or mis represented. Like the article that was in the science article last year on PCB's was proven to be so absurd and ridiculous that is was dismissed by no less than the Harvard School of Medicine. Hardly a pro aquaculture organization. All I am saying is that there is a report due out next year that is not being funded by either the enviromental groups or the industry. Hopefully it will answer questions in a more honest fashion. If the evidence is there and it points the finger at farms then I am on your side. I want to have wild salmon in the ocean for my kids to see more than anything.I am not a shill for the industry by any means. However what does bug me is people using fear tactics to and misinformation skew the truth. The end result is people tune out and then nothing gets accomplished. That being said I don't trust big corporations either to guard our resource. However that applies to both aquaculture and commercial fishing.
 
Barbender can we afford to risk it? Maybe all the studies are wrong, but what if they just happen to be right - is it worth the risk?

Also its worth noting that the biggest problem according to DFO facing Pacific Salmon is ocean survival - connection, maybe?

Move the pens inland, problem solved.

I've written to the premier and pat bell on the issue and I have recieved a couple of personal responses.

I urge all others to not be lazy and take at least 5 minutes to outline your concerns. I know many people will ***** and moan on a message board but can't be bothered to write and email or letter - don't be one of those guys.

Pat Bell Minister of Agriculture and Lands
pat.bell.mla@leg.bc.ca,
AL.Minister@gov.bc.ca

Gorden Campbell, Premier
premier@gov.bc.ca
 
quote:Originally posted by Poppa Swiss

Barbender can we afford to risk it? Maybe all the studies are wrong, but what if they just happen to be right - is it worth the risk?

Also its worth noting that the biggest problem according to DFO facing Pacific Salmon is ocean survival - connection, maybe?

Move the pens inland, problem solved.

I've written to the premier and pat bell on the issue and I have recieved a couple of personal responses.

I urge all others to not be lazy and take at least 5 minutes to outline your concerns. I know many people will ***** and moan on a message board but can't be bothered to write and email or letter - don't be one of those guys.

Pat Bell Minister of Agriculture and Lands
pat.bell.mla@leg.bc.ca,
AL.Minister@gov.bc.ca

Gorden Campbell, Premier
premier@gov.bc.ca

Wonder if you could raise Pinks in a freshwater lake? Other salmon species grow to adulthoot in the great lakes. You would have a nice, ready-to-go pen with it's own drainage that could be filtered. I'm wondering if the organic sludge from the bottom would have any value as fertilizer? You would have to do in a whole lake to do it, but I'm sure there are lots of "non-pristine" lakes on this rock that would do it, and have much greater capacity then all of the pens along the coast.
 
quote:Originally posted by Barbender

There is a big study being done right now by the Pacific Salmon Foundation that has been looking at the Sea Lice issue from a objective view point. Unlike the recent junk report done by Morton and company which picked through the info that it wanted and completely ignored other facts. It makes good press but can hardly be considered reliable. Hopefully when the report comes out in 2008 we will have some concrete information about what is happening. Of course if it disproves Morton and company then it will be discredited and the finger pointing will start up again.

Note to all, the PSF is totally funded by the Provincial Government.
There will be more on this in the future as one will always wonder how the reports were done and the reason for this.
 
I agree with Poppa Swiss, we must keep pestering the politicians on this. If we don't, they will just assume that most interested parties agree with their policy. If enough of us keep writing in with our objection to open pen salmon farming then maybe, eventually they will listen, especially if it can be made an election issue. I don't actually know anyone who would eat farmed salmon anyway. As far as I am concerned it's just rubbish, full of PCBs, antibiotics, hormones and assorted chemicals. I also been told it contains traces of machalite green which is a proven carcogen. Please keep pestering the politicians, as many letters sent in as possible objecting to this policy and telling them that they do not own these wild fish, they are just custodians with a duty to protect our wild salmon for future generations.
 
...I agree too, but it is just a small proportion of the true issue. It is a very complicated and totally entwined issue - we really do need to work on that of what we need to change. we need to build upon new solutions - perminent ones!!! Ones that count and ones that will change direction...don't rest until we have what is needed to complete our futrure in a possitive direction. I will accept nothing more or nothing less!

Cheers,
RVP. ;)



quote:Originally posted by gallows

I agree with Poppa Swiss, we must keep pestering the politicians on this. If we don't, they will just assume that most interested parties agree with their policy. If enough of us keep writing in with our objection to open pen salmon farming then maybe, eventually they will listen, especially if it can be made an election issue. I don't actually know anyone who would eat farmed salmon anyway. As far as I am concerned it's just rubbish, full of PCBs, antibiotics, hormones and assorted chemicals. I also been told it contains traces of machalite green which is a proven carcogen. Please keep pestering the politicians, as many letters sent in as possible objecting to this policy and telling them that they do not own these wild fish, they are just custodians with a duty to protect our wild salmon for future generations.
 
A curious observation this summer. The DFO chartered a boat, and spent many days testing up Knight inlet and the Broughtons. They used the same method as Ms Morton, going to the beaches in a small boat, and netting and dipping samples of pinks. The only difference was they purposeley, DID NOT test anywhere near any fish farms!
Also, in this neck of the woods,(Knight inlet up past Hardy), has anyone else but me noticed that 90% of the new RCA's surround working and fallowed fish farm sites! It seems Big brother does not want anyone dipping a hook near any fish farms, it sure as hell aint to protect the cod....Joe
 
FYI fishing bottom fish near a farm is one of the most productive spots. Usually they are teaming with fish. Of course that does not make good press. Anyway it is a emotional issue and people believe what they want to believe. I can tell you that I could use the same data that Morton used and the same selective reasoning and prove that salmon farms increased Pink runs. Of course it would be viewed with skeptisism (rightfully so) however when a activist does it somehow it is gospel truth. For the record this is the last post on the issue for me. I am not here to debate. I am here to listen to fishing stories and hear how better other fishermen did than me (by last count that was 95% of the members). All I can say is that most of the info you hear on salmon farms is absolute lies or total misrepresentation of the facts. I will also say that I know that most of you that are against it do it from a position of caring for our resource and that is commendable. However I too value the resource and that is one of the reasons why I support aquaculture.
 
Barbender, I respect your opinion on this subject. It is an emotional one. We all have differing views. Actually, I don't object to acquaculture completely, I just object to marine open net pen acquaculture. I have no argument with closed containment methods. It's still my personal choice if I would eat farmed fish or give it to my family. Didn't the government produce guidelines for the recommended amount of farmed fish one should consume over a given period. Can't remember what the amount was however and I can't recall where I saw it. Do keep posting because differing views keep these threads interesting.
 
Here's an idea that everyone ought to be able to agree upon: Removing our fish farms from the ocean would remove all the risks they create for our fragile West Coast ecosystem.
 
Good thinking Red. I think we should close down all commercial farming operations. Cattle farming creates so much methane gas in a year it is heating up the oceans and killing young salmon (proven) not to mention the amount of fecal matter 4 billion cattle produce. We should also close all poultry farms due to the high nitrogen content in poultry manure (toxic and proven). The runoff kills streams and causes plankton blooms that kills smolts and juvenile salmon. We should also close down all commercial produce farms because they drain salmon rivers for irrigation and the runoff is toxic and kills juvenile salmon (again proven). We should all go back to eating grass and alder bark. Bravo.....
 
YOU are missing the point BENDER!!!!!!
Unfortunattly you are pro choice for fish farms so you are going to defend them because you work on them as stated from previous posts. I personally think there is a need for them but as you know knight inlet area there is a problem up there. I have seen first hand the destruction that has happened there !!!!

Why not put them out of the ocean and on land????whats the harm in that ????hhhm no escapement now and leftover food etc etc!!!!!

I know because it costs more and they have to be manned 24/7 so what you pass that cost on just LIKE everything else in the world big deal.
How can you argue that the knight inlet pink run has been decimated by the lice from the fish farms its right there and yet you still say no way !!!!there are no cattle/chicken farms there at all it is remote area.
If you have an answer as to why I am all ears to listen but we all know why!!!! there is way to many farms in that area the poor fish dont stand a chance and they are only talking about the pinks what about the springs,steelhead,coho,chum,trout etc in that area???I am more than positive they have had been impacted as well!!!!

I respect what you do for a job but at what costs do we stop KILLING our waters with pollution from these fish farms??????

Wolf
 
quote:--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Originally posted by Barbender

For the record this is the last post on the issue for me. I am not here to debate.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Ok Ok your right Backatit. I am clamming up and watching from the sidelines.
 
Back
Top