Charlie
Well-Known Member
I was just reading up on the difference between the Fraser River 2009 and 2010 Sockeye returns, looking for some reason for why a collapse one year and record return the next. It is kind of interesting, as there isn’t much difference in the State of the Pacific Ocean between the years 2006/2007/2008. With those years showing improvements, basically due to the La Niña conditions.
I am not really done, but this is the information I am currently finding. Looking at the State of the Pacific Ocean 2007 report and here are some excerpts from it I found interesting:
So that pretty much tells us the 2009 collapse was NOT from any state of the ocean conditions and DFO already knows that! Doesn’t take much of any investigation for that one? Plus, it pretty much spells out, it was:
NOT from Deepsea zooplankton growth in the Gulf of Alaska.
NOT from the effects of the PDO or Victoria Mode.
NOT from the effects of El Niño and La Niña. The current El Niño started in 2009.
NOT from any shortage of any food source.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/CSAS/Csas/Publications/SAR-AS/2008/SAR-AS2008_028_E.pdf
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/csas-sccs/Publications/ResDocs-DocRech/2008/2008_013-eng.htm
www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sci/psarc/OSRs/Ocean_SSR_e.htm
So what was it?
Now here is something I remembered reading, published by a COSEWIC COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF ENDANGERED WILDLIFE IN CANADA, Assessment and Status Report on the Sockeye Salmon Cultus population dated 2003. So I decided to review it again.
Hmmm… Pretty much further spells out while DFO is telling everyone sea lice aren’t effecting wild salmon – there seems to be a published report raising concerns stating otherwise, doesn’t it.
But wait… this gets better as I am trying to figure this out! As we all know, the required threshold for the treatment of sea lice with ‘SLICE’ is three (3) and we also know it requires a licensed veterinarian to prescribe that treatment – by Canadian law. Now how about this? Historically in past years treatment was not prescribed (especially during the winter months) until that threshold of three was well exceeded. I’ll just use Potts Bay as that example. In November ‘Avg Motiles’ was 8. Treatment wasn’t prescribed until December 13, 2009 when it reached twenty-three (23)! Tad bit over that three (3) number, isn’t it? I am used to seeing that.
Potts Bay
12-Nov-09 1.65 0.13 1.80 1.75 4.33 0.20 8.00 40 13107
1-Dec-09 10.70 8.15 6.65 1.30 6.45 4.20 22.55 20 13071 13-Dec-09 (23)
But, here it comes… are you ready? I am not used to seeing this? Can someone explain this one to me? I start looking at some locations and notice something out of the ordinary - not normal that I haven’t seen before. Here is what I noticed, the last numbers are the date of treatment and the number of ‘Avg Motiles’ in ( ):
Larsen
26-May-10 0.17 0.42 1.05 0.32 0.12 0.97 1.90 60 508135 1-Jun-10 (2.5)
Midsummer
18-May-10 2.55 0.63 0.52 0.30 0.35 4.71 1.85 60 427653 18-May-10 (2.5)
Glacier Falls
29-May-10 22.54 0.32 0.26 0.11 0.39 5.39 1.08 60 416715 1-Jun-10 (2)
Humphrey
28-Nov-09 0.37 0.03 0.18 0.10 0.15 0.02 0.47 60 538558 16-Nov-09 (1)
Sargeaunts Pass
14-Nov-09 0.13 0.07 0.03 0.07 0.03 0.17 0.20 60 871427 20-Nov-09 (1)
http://www.marineharvestcanada.com/farming_fish_health_broughton_area.php
http://www.marineharvestcanada.com/farming_farm_locations.php?area_id=7
So, as I am looking at these different numbers I have came up with some interesting questions and I have to find the answers:
1. What is the REAL reason DFO is not releasing any fish farm records?
2. Does DFO already know sea lice are killing wild smolts and doesn’t want that information released?
3. WHY ARE LICENSED VETERINARIANS “NOW” PRESCRIBING “SLICE” FOR FISH FARMS - BASED ON AN ‘AVG MOBILES’ OF LESS THAN “3”?
4. Who authorized that treatment outside the requirement of Canada law?
5. Why are fish farms now treating with an average as low as one (1)mobile?
If you check you will find the above are indeed on the Fraser sockeye migration route.
Sould I just make this my opinion (has to be an opinion – as no one will provide any information) that all those treatments were authorized and/or required by DFO?
Still wondering what caused the 2009 Fraser sockeye collapse and why a record year in 2010... I bet if you compare those "fish farm" records for those two years, you will find the answers? Any bets?
I am not really done, but this is the information I am currently finding. Looking at the State of the Pacific Ocean 2007 report and here are some excerpts from it I found interesting:
quote:
Except for a brief warm period in summer, local ocean waters were cooler than normal through 2007 and into 2008, in contrast to warm waters of the previous four years. These cooler temperatures were associated with La Niña conditions in spring and autumn 2007, and also to a shift in the Pacific Decadal Oscillation to a cool state. This local cooling was the global exception. Most of the world was warmer than normal with record high temperatures over land and the most reduced extent and duration of Arctic sea ice on record.
However, biomass of the euphausid T. spinifera, an important food source for juvenile salmon entering Barkley Sound, was low in 2007, indicating poor growth of salmon stocks that migrate through there and feed on this prey. The shift to a much stronger La Niña in winter 2007-08 anticipates improvement in growth and survival rates for WCVI coho, sockeye, and chinook migrating seaward in 2008.
General groundfish surveys, now into their fourth year, reported low catch weights per tow in 2007 in all regions. In Queen Charlotte Sound, in particular, an across-the-board decrease in biomass indices for almost all species was noted. Herring biomass was low in most BC waters, (except Strait of Georgia), attributed to less feed and more predators during previous warm years when herring were young and small in size. Low recruitment rates are expected in the next few years in all regions. Biomasses of pink shrimp, arrowtooth flounder, Dover sole, and Pacific halibut off the west coast of Vancouver Island in May declined, also attributed to warm waters of previous years. Hake were few in number off the west coast of Vancouver Island and scattered into many more regions in 2007 in BC waters. Reasons for the declines and scattering are not clear, but low T. spinifera biomass (a favourite hake food) and interactions with jumbo squid, a recent intruder are potential explanations. Interestingly, the 2007 hake survey captured these squid in Canadian waters only.
In the Strait of Georgia, surface waters were somewhat warmer than normal through the year, but deeper waters cooled to temperatures observed in 1999 to 2002. Phytoplankton biomass was higher in summer and lower in autumn. Its spring bloom arrived relatively early. Herring biomass declined from the very high levels of only a few years ago. Very few Fraser River sockeye returned to spawn in 2007, most likely due to very poor feeding conditions and/or increases in predators resulting from warm waters during the spring of 2005. Marine indicators of ocean productivity suggest that sockeye survivals in 2008 should be somewhat better than in 2007, but still below normal. Coho salmon returns to the Strait of Georgia in 2008 are predicted to be low, perhaps even lower than in 2006, based on very poor growth and low CPUE recorded in the 2007 survey in the Strait of Georgia. Chinook returns in 2008 are predicted to be below average - numbers of 5-yr olds returning from the disastrous 2005 sea entry year will probably be very low. Chum returns in 2008 are anticipated to be average, based on the average CPUEs in the July 2006 survey. It is expected that there will be a large abundance of juvenile pink salmon in the strait in 2008, which may put pressure on marine survival of other juvenile salmonids.
ASSESSMENT AND CONCLUSIONS
Our globe was warm almost everywhere, but the Northeast Pacific cooled with La Niña
According to the NASA Goddard Institute for Space Studies, the temperature over land and ocean in 2007 was tied with 1998 for the second warmest year in the era of instrument data, which began in the late 1800s. Land temperatures in 2007 were the highest since the beginning of instrumental record…
The most anomalously warm ocean surface appeared in the Arctic Ocean north of Bering Strait, contributing to the record low ice coverage in the Arctic Ocean in late summer 2007. Land temperatures have risen steadily since the 1970s, and the moderating effect of ocean temperatures has kept the global average temperature over land and sea from rising as rapidly. But in the eastern Pacific from Cape Horn to Alaska, waters ran much cooler than normal in 2007.
Other ocean indices such as PDO and its sister the Victoria Mode also track these cool waters. Wind patterns over the Gulf of Alaska often vary with the rise and decline of both El Niño and La Niña.
Winter winds in 2006-07 and 2007-08 blew from a more westerly direction, with colder temperatures. Coldest winds were in January 2008 (right panel), with isobars distorted by shifts in the Aleutian Low (L) and North Pacific High (H)…
The BC and Oregon zooplankton communities returned to ‘coolocean’ species in 2007
Although cooling began in BC southern shelf waters in 2006, recovery of the boreal shelf copepods and northern chaetognaths and decline of the southern copepods and chaetognaths were delayed until 2007. Even in 2007, the return to cool ocean biomass levels and community mix was confined primarily to the continental shelf. Offshore waters off southern Vancouver Island remained relatively unproductive.
The copepod community on the Oregon Shelf was a “cold water boreal” community and dominated by cold neritic species, from February through December 2007. This is in contrast to the previous three (warm) years during which warm neritic species were prominent (Paracalanus parvus, Acartia tonsa and Calanus pacificus), as shown in last year’s “State of the Pacific Ocean” report.
The changes in zooplankton community composition in the past two decades appear to have had large effects on fish growth and survival, probably because the ‘cool water’ zooplankton are better fish food (larger individual body size and much higher energy content). Because much of the year-to-year variability of marine survival rate of harvested fish species occurs at early life stages (for salmon, in their first year after ocean entry), recent zooplankton anomalies provide a useful index of juvenile fish nutrition and a ‘leading indicator’ for subsequent adult fish recruitment.
Total mesozooplankton biomass for the deep-sea offshore BC region (from the continental slope out to 145 °W and between 48° and 55 °N) was very focussed in 2007 with most of the spring/summer biomass (73%) occurring in May and a second smaller peak in July. Although conditions were cooler, the time of peak biomass has not yet returned to June, where it was during cool conditions in 2000/01. The 2007 Neocalanus plumchrus peak, which makes up the bulk of the spring biomass, was later than it was during the warmer 2004-2006 period but not as late as in 2000/01. However, the copepod biomass in July 2007 was mostly made up of the larger N. cristatus; high numbers of this species have not been seen this late in the year since 2001.
Low returns of sockeye coast-wide, especially in the Fraser
With the exception of northern B.C., sockeye returns were generally low in 2007 (Fig. 10).
Looking at the time series for various index stocks indicates:
• Since 1970, maximum returns for all populations occurred during the early 1990’s immediately following the strong La Niña event of 1989.
• Central Coast, Vancouver Island (WCVI) and Fraser index-stocks all declined from early-1990s highs to persistent, sub-average returns since the mid-1990s.
• North Coast and Transboundary index-stocks declined from early-1990s highs to subaverage values by the late-1990s but since the year 2000 have exhibited a higher frequency of above-average returns than Central and South coast stocks.
• Populations entering continental shelf areas under stronger oceanic influences appear most responsive to La Niña-like (anomalously cool, survival favourable) and El Niño-like (anomalously warm, survival less favourable) conditions than stocks entering more protected estuarine waters.
• Persistence of strong El Niño-like conditions through the 2005 sea entry period by smolts was associated with low adult return rates in 2007 for Central Coast (Rivers and Smith Inlet), WCVI (Barkley Sound) and Fraser (Chilko Lake) sockeye index stocks.
All four major run timing groups of sockeye salmon returned to the Fraser River in very low numbers in 2007. These low returns are almost certainly due to unusually poor ocean conditions after juvenile salmon left the river in spring 2005, a factor that hampered DFO predictions of returning numbers.
How bad were ocean conditions for Fraser River salmon? Fig. 11 shows a time series of marine survival for Chilko Lake Fraser River sockeye. The 2003 Chilko Lake brood year entered the ocean in 2005 and returned to spawn in 2007. Their marine survival was dismal, tied for the second lowest in more than 50 years of records.
Accurately forecasting salmon returns is difficult, and DFO forecast numbers were too high for all major Fraser sockeye populations in 2007, as revealed in Fig. 12. Forecast models like the ones used for Fraser sockeye assume average survival conditions based on the historical time series. Therefore, in years when survival conditions are less than what has been observed in the past, as occurred for the salmon that returned in 2007, forecasts under-estimate observed returns. Part of the challenge is to understand the relative importance of factors occurring in fresh water versus factors operating in the ocean. The Chilko stock is the only major sockeye population in the Fraser watershed where smolts are routinely counted en route to the ocean, and hence is the only population where we can separate the role of freshwater and marine factors affecting survival. Sockeye fry numbers are estimated in various lakes using hydroacoustic equipment (sounders), but significant freshwater mortality can occur between the time fry numbers are estimated and the sockeye migrate to sea nine months later as smolts.
Sampling in the Strait of Georgia in June and September helps us understand what occurs during the early marine life of salmon. Observations of juveniles in the Strait of Georgia in 2005 indicated no problem with marine survival, suggesting normal returns in 2007. In 2005 relatively high surface ocean temperatures associated with reduced marine survivals existed, but higher temperatures in earlier years did not result in the extremely low marine survivals found for this brood year.
From the Georgia Basin, juvenile Fraser sockeye normally migrate through Johnstone Strait, Queen Charlotte Sound and northward along the continental shelf. It appears now that conditions in these waters were poor, based on low returns of sockeye and poor marine survival of seabirds near Vancouver Island.
Previous State of the Ocean Reports noted poor survival of juvenile coho and fledgling seabirds along the west coast of Vancouver Island in 2005, due to poor ocean conditions. Seabirds survival was the worst ever observed from California to Triangle Island off northern Vancouver Island. However, seabirds appeared fine north of this range in 2005, suggesting returns of sockeye in 2007 would be normal.
Indicators of ocean productivity, such as PDO and coastal sea surface temperatures, suggested reduced survivals for sockeye returning in 2007.
One analysis, reported in last year’s report, compared Chilko Lake marine survival with ocean temperature observations for the brood years 1952-2002. These suggested that increased survivals were associated with a cooler Gulf of Alaska from January to August of ocean entry year and a warmer Gulf of Alaska from November to July of the return year. Conditions for the 2007 returning populations were just the opposite and quite extreme, pointing to poor returns. However, given past unreliability of using Chilko Lake sockeye in non-dominant years as indicators of other sockeye populations, it was not clear how to use this finding.
Future forecasts will consider how to more effectively use climatic, physical and biological oceanographic data to inform quantitative return forecasts. A possible approach presents data from previous State of the Pacific Ocean reports corresponding to the 2005 and 2006 entry years in a “report card” format (Table 1). Qualitatively, all indicators for 2005 were poor (below average), and this type of information could be used to recommend the acceptance of a conservative probability forecast. The good news is that 2006 marine indicators of ocean productivity suggest that the survivals of sockeye returning in 2008 should be somewhat better than for those that returned in 2007. Unfortunately, the number of spawners in 2004 was the lowest for this cycle year, indicating that even with near average survivals, that returns will be low in 2008.
So that pretty much tells us the 2009 collapse was NOT from any state of the ocean conditions and DFO already knows that! Doesn’t take much of any investigation for that one? Plus, it pretty much spells out, it was:
NOT from Deepsea zooplankton growth in the Gulf of Alaska.
NOT from the effects of the PDO or Victoria Mode.
NOT from the effects of El Niño and La Niña. The current El Niño started in 2009.
NOT from any shortage of any food source.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/CSAS/Csas/Publications/SAR-AS/2008/SAR-AS2008_028_E.pdf
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/csas-sccs/Publications/ResDocs-DocRech/2008/2008_013-eng.htm
www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sci/psarc/OSRs/Ocean_SSR_e.htm
So what was it?
Now here is something I remembered reading, published by a COSEWIC COMMITTEE ON THE STATUS OF ENDANGERED WILDLIFE IN CANADA, Assessment and Status Report on the Sockeye Salmon Cultus population dated 2003. So I decided to review it again.
http://www.sararegistry.gc.ca/virtual_sara/files/cosewic/sr_cultus_sockeye_salmon_e.pdfquote: Fraser sockeye smolts move quickly through the Fraser estuary and into the Strait of Georgia in April and May (Healey 1980). They migrate northward through Johnstone Strait by July, then northwest along the coast until late fall or winter when they begin to move offshore into the Gulf of Alaska where they rear with other sockeye stocks for about two years. The timing of the offshore movement is affected by a complex interplay of physical (temperature, salinity), biological (age, size, prey abundance) and genetic (disposition to specific migratory patterns) factors (Burgner 1991). North American sockeye utilize the area south and east of Kodiak Island, with Fraser sockeye distributed further south (to 46º N) (Burgner 1991). Their distributions, while predictable in a general way, have not been reliably linked to major oceanographic features such as circulation patterns and temperature and salinity fronts (Burgner 1991). Cultus sockeye are vulnerable to the impacts of human development during their smolt emigration and migration through near-shore coastal waters. The lower Fraser River is heavily developed as it passes through a community of over two million people: the estuary has been encroached by development and is constrained by dykes and river entrainment structures; and effluent from pulp mills and small communities is common along the coast. There is also a growing number of fish farms on the marine migratory pathway of juvenile sockeye as they move north along the coast of British Columbia. Concerns have recently been expressed regarding the potential transfer of diseases and parasites such as sea lice between salmon farms and wild populations, especially in areas of dense salmon farming (Gardner and Peterson 2003).
Hmmm… Pretty much further spells out while DFO is telling everyone sea lice aren’t effecting wild salmon – there seems to be a published report raising concerns stating otherwise, doesn’t it.
But wait… this gets better as I am trying to figure this out! As we all know, the required threshold for the treatment of sea lice with ‘SLICE’ is three (3) and we also know it requires a licensed veterinarian to prescribe that treatment – by Canadian law. Now how about this? Historically in past years treatment was not prescribed (especially during the winter months) until that threshold of three was well exceeded. I’ll just use Potts Bay as that example. In November ‘Avg Motiles’ was 8. Treatment wasn’t prescribed until December 13, 2009 when it reached twenty-three (23)! Tad bit over that three (3) number, isn’t it? I am used to seeing that.
Potts Bay
12-Nov-09 1.65 0.13 1.80 1.75 4.33 0.20 8.00 40 13107
1-Dec-09 10.70 8.15 6.65 1.30 6.45 4.20 22.55 20 13071 13-Dec-09 (23)
But, here it comes… are you ready? I am not used to seeing this? Can someone explain this one to me? I start looking at some locations and notice something out of the ordinary - not normal that I haven’t seen before. Here is what I noticed, the last numbers are the date of treatment and the number of ‘Avg Motiles’ in ( ):
Larsen
26-May-10 0.17 0.42 1.05 0.32 0.12 0.97 1.90 60 508135 1-Jun-10 (2.5)
Midsummer
18-May-10 2.55 0.63 0.52 0.30 0.35 4.71 1.85 60 427653 18-May-10 (2.5)
Glacier Falls
29-May-10 22.54 0.32 0.26 0.11 0.39 5.39 1.08 60 416715 1-Jun-10 (2)
Humphrey
28-Nov-09 0.37 0.03 0.18 0.10 0.15 0.02 0.47 60 538558 16-Nov-09 (1)
Sargeaunts Pass
14-Nov-09 0.13 0.07 0.03 0.07 0.03 0.17 0.20 60 871427 20-Nov-09 (1)
http://www.marineharvestcanada.com/farming_fish_health_broughton_area.php
http://www.marineharvestcanada.com/farming_farm_locations.php?area_id=7
So, as I am looking at these different numbers I have came up with some interesting questions and I have to find the answers:
1. What is the REAL reason DFO is not releasing any fish farm records?
2. Does DFO already know sea lice are killing wild smolts and doesn’t want that information released?
3. WHY ARE LICENSED VETERINARIANS “NOW” PRESCRIBING “SLICE” FOR FISH FARMS - BASED ON AN ‘AVG MOBILES’ OF LESS THAN “3”?
4. Who authorized that treatment outside the requirement of Canada law?
5. Why are fish farms now treating with an average as low as one (1)mobile?
If you check you will find the above are indeed on the Fraser sockeye migration route.
Sould I just make this my opinion (has to be an opinion – as no one will provide any information) that all those treatments were authorized and/or required by DFO?
Still wondering what caused the 2009 Fraser sockeye collapse and why a record year in 2010... I bet if you compare those "fish farm" records for those two years, you will find the answers? Any bets?