ATTENTION: JOIN THE WAR ON FISHFARMING!

Thanks Red
The April Report on additional testing/surveying Hume refers to is I believe the work Morton et al has been doing in the Campbell River area.
Should be interesting results.

One of the problems with fisheries management (and I don't mean just DFO) is that there is no "ownership" group to champion their cause. There are, however, many, many, small and diverse factions promoting their own agendas.

Maybe the Natives are the ones to take on the feds and the province.

As a side note I think the Natives should also take on the feds and province for their lack of co-ordination and co-operation in development that has impacted the whole spawning system (from interception - read catch rates - to destruction of streams and estuarine areas). No point in having a good escapement to the open ocean if there are no places for returning spawners to do their thing. But that is a topic for another thread.
 
Hey Terry, why don't you get in touch with those chiefs that are somewhat close and we could arrange a meeting with them to discuss mutual interests? I am sure they would welcome any partner for their battle which will be essentially ours too...
 
Howdy,

I've thought lots about whether or not to run at this with or without the support of First Nations peoples.

Remember, BC's Natives are also divided on this contentious issue; some tribes are fishfarming and think it's great.

Given a choice between farmed or Wild, I think they would seek council with the Elders and the Great Spirit and trust me - the Great Spirit was not grown in a cage.

I grew up in North Van. Several Squamish Nation People are among my friends. I don't anticipate too much trouble establishing contact when and if the time comes.

I want to get the initial 'Alliance' meeting out of the way so we can chart our course. I have some ideas and I'm expecting many of you to show up with some good ones also.

As soon as I get a 'Ya' or 'Na' from the newspapers on this pending publication - which will alert thousands to our cause - I'll have a better grip on how many might attend before I call the meeting.

The 'Alliance' broke 80!

Cheers,
Terry
 
Stephen Hume
Vancouver Sun


Wednesday, January 30, 2008


Here on the Salmon Coast, soul-stirring runs return with the rains. We always know both are coming, we don't know how much.

And, just like the weather, while everybody talks about the fate of wild salmon, nobody does anything about it.

The iconic salmon is entangled in our sense of identity. It symbolizes our home and reminds us of our own transient place in nature. First nations elders say their cultural survival is linked to salmon.

Yet our misty-eyed reverence evaporates the moment the needs of salmon conflict with somebody making money.

For example, every year since 1993 the Fraser has been prominent on the annual list of endangered rivers. Threats include gravel extraction, logging, farming and suburban sprawl.

So it's no surprise that, even as we get more grim news about the prospects for wild salmon survival, another huge gravel mining operation prepares to scalp salmon spawning habitat.

After studying 30 years of data, the David Suzuki Foundation found shocking salmon declines. Since 1990, stocks plummeted by 70 to 93 per cent among 10 representative B.C. populations.

The report doesn't say it, so I will. Among our leading culprits is the federal Department of Fisheries and Oceans, notwithstanding its many fine individual scientists, dedicated public servants and their notable achievements.

But the DFO pontificates about wild salmon policy while behaving like a hostage to industry. Although specifically mandated to protect wild salmon, it approves projects which biologists say will harm them.

It salves its conscience with promises it seems incapable of fulfilling. What else to conclude from watching salmon runs under its stewardship dwindle from astonishing abundance to pathetic tatters?

You don't have to be Sherlock Holmes to notice that the period in which the steepest declines began coincides with the Mulroney government's remaking of the department. Sure, the DFO nabs the occasional poacher, illegal clam digger or householder messing with riparian zones, but when it comes to the big-ticket stuff, it just doesn't seem present or accounted for.

Want to "mine" the province's most important and endangered salmon river -- be our guests! Decide that of all possible locations on this huge coast, you simply must locate your fish farm on a main migration route -- no problem! Leave a salmon river so choked with debris torrents it looks like a landing strip for jumbo jets -- let bygones be bygones!

Our provincial government is also a player in this two-faced farce. Pave the parks, treat them like a land bank for resort development, liquidate the old growth in watersheds, let timber giants convert forest reserves to real estate without paying the compensation due as the original deal for access to public lands, kiss off the last spotted owl habitat, industrialize pristine foreshores, turn a blind eye to repeated pollution permit violations.

Similar hypocrisy permeates the commercial fishing sector. The same folks lamenting DFO incompetence will lobby furiously for fisheries openings that biologists warn may tip already weak stocks like the Sakinaw or Cultus sockeye over the brink and into the abyss of extinction.

Sports anglers think it's all about them. Salmon returns are declining? Let's kill all the seals so there are more fish for us. No Chinooks in the Cowichan River? Let's launch a bizarre ocean ranching scheme in which the release of hatchery fish at convenient fishing spots will create angling opportunities that mask the real declines in abundance.

First nations aren't immune either, not if there's a major buck to be made logging or mining a watershed or digging the gravel out of spawning beds. All of us, all the while, go on chanting the sanctimonious mantra of the sacred salmon.

Well, as I've said before, in a democracy, citizens get exactly what they deserve. The onus for change lies not with the bullied bureaucrats but with the voters who have the power to hold accountable those to whom they delegate authority.

Time to start asking yourself whether your grandchildren deserve a coast of barren rivers and denuded landscapes, in which the salmon that once came to us by the hundreds of millions have largely been lost to concrete blocks, video games and toilet paper.

shume@islandnet.com
 
I wrote to Gordon Campbell and Pat Bell on Dec. 18th and finally received a personal response:

quote:Dear Mr. Canning:
The Honourable Gordon Campbell, Premier, has asked me to reply to your e-mail of December 18, 2007, regarding wild salmon and salmon aquaculture. As Minister responsible, I am pleased to respond.
A key component to the Province’s commitment to sustainable fisheries, both wild and farm, was the establishment of the Pacific Salmon Forum (PSF). The PSF provides a neutral point of view to make available impartial information on the management of wild and farm salmon independent of government direction.

I strongly support research into the viability of closed containment systems. An assessment of closed containment is underway using the Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat process (CSAS), which also includes assessment of waste treatment options. The CSAS was established by Fisheries and Oceans Canada to coordinate the peer review of scientific issues and will provide guidance on further investment in pilot scale initiatives.

A description of the CSAS and its role can be found online at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/csas/Csas/Home-Accueil_e.htm. The province is providing funding to support the CSAS review of closed containment.
The above approach is consistent with the recent recommendation of the PSF, which called for a detailed assessment of closed containment technology prior to any substantive investment of public funds in commercial trials. I think it is reasonable to take these initial steps to ensure we focus our investments on the right questions and provide the best possible chance of developing viable and sustainable systems.

Current provincial policy on salmon farming is not at end point. Should evidence arise indicating that further or different action is necessary, government is committed to altering course and responding in a meaningful way to ensure the long-term preservation of wild stocks.

Thank you for sharing your concerns, ideas and comments.
Sincerely,
Pat Bell
Minister
pc: Honourable Gordon Campbell
Premier

Goes to show that a personalized well written letter can get a response. The more letters the more they will address our concerns. I urge everybody to take 5 minutes and write a short letter to the following emails:

Gordon Campbell
premier@gov.bc.ca

Pat Bell
pat.bell.mla@leg.bc.ca
 
E-mail sent.
 
http://www.friendsofwildsalmon.ca/


I searched for a link to this group on this site, but couldn't find mention of it yet. A good friend of mine who guides on the Kispiox has been working with them for the past year or so. Very similar, though geographically focussed aims to ours. Well put together website too. Apologies if the link has been posted before...
 
Howdy,

Thanks Pangaea.

Cool website... eh Kev?

Seems they are more or less oriented the same way we are and that is a very good thing.

The way I read it is, the only difference between us and them - and many other's in opposition to the net-pen industry - is that they would settle for an agreement not to expand the industry northwards as well as recognition of the imperative not to locate farms at river-mouths.

I (we) differ on these points because the focus of the Wild Salmon Alliance is to 'Sink the fishfarms!' and rid our coastline of them forever. End of story.

Today the 'Alliance' stands at: 84

Cheers,
Terry

Wild Salmon Alliance
 
Communiqué
For Immediate Release
February 7, 2008
BC PACIFIC SALMON FORUM’S SCIENCE ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETS WITH RESEARCHERS
NANAIMO:
The Pacific Salmon Forum’s Science Advisory Committee (SAC) met today with Martin Krkosek, Alexandra Morton, Subhash Lele and Mark A. Lewis, co-authors of a study on sea lice and Pacific salmon published recently in Science. This meeting was requested by the Forum to clarify certain aspects of the study.
The authors and members of the SAC had a detailed and positive discussion of the paper and its assumptions.
There was general acknowledgement that the analysis in the paper shows that sea lice infestations between 2001and 2005 likely contributed to depressed productivity of pink salmon in the Broughton Archipelago.
There was general agreement that the paper’s predictions regarding extinction are dependent on future management regimes.
Research currently being conducted by the authors and the Forum will help to identify effective management of sea lice to sustain pink salmon in the Broughton.
- 30 -
Hon. John Fraser, Chair
BC Pacific Salmon Forum
MEDIA CONTACT:
250 755-3036
 
Sunday » February 10 » 2008

Government-funded group switches sides on risks of fish farms
Pacific Salmon Forum now agrees sea lice are killing salmon

Scott Simpson
Vancouver Sun


Saturday, February 09, 2008


In a major blow to British Columbia's salmon farming industry, a government-funded research group says it now accepts a recent scientific study that warns of mass extinctions of wild pink salmon on the central coast due to salmon farming.

In an uncirculated "communique" obtained on Friday by The Vancouver Sun, the Pacific Salmon Forum has acknowledged that sea lice infestations contributed to plummeting pink salmon populations in the Broughton Archipelago from 2001-2005 -- as noted in a recent article in Science, a leading international research journal.

The article by Martin Krkosek, co-researcher Alexandra Morton and others, drew international attention. It warned that wild pink salmon could be extinct within four years on the B.C. central coast due to sea lice infestations arising from salmon farms in that area.

The article was condemned by B.C. salmon farmers who said it was motivated by opposition to the industry rather than pure scientific research.

Initially, the forum also criticized the article -- suggesting it was overstating the gravity of the situation -- and announced in a news release on December 18 that it was inviting the authors for a meeting at forum headquarters in Nanaimo to discuss its findings.

That meeting took place Thursday and has apparently prompted the forum's science advisory committee to soften its stance.

A forum communique dated Feb. 7 and passed along to the Sun on Friday by Watershed Watch Salmon Society expresses "general agreement" that future pink salmon extinctions will depend on "future management regimes."

In other words, Watershed Watch executive director Craig Orr noted in a telephone interview on Friday, it's up to government fisheries managers to decide the extent of the impact on wild salmon.

"That is really crucial for sure. It means, what the hell are we going to do?" Orr said.

Watershed Watch has been recommending the province compel salmon farmers to fallow, or leave vacant, any farm sites that lie along migratory routes for wild juvenile pink salmon emerging into the Broughton from their natal streams in the spring.

Last year, a provincial legislature committee studying fish farming also recommended the industry switch from open-net sea pens to closed-containment pens that would prevent lice infestations at farms from spreading to wild fish migrating in the vicinity.

Both recommendations have been ignored by the province.

"We've been asking for a fallow route. We've been asking for closed-containment [sea pens]. We've been asking for [Broughton salmon farmers] Marine Harvest to reduce their lice loads. Their vets fight us all the time on that," Orr said.

"Does this mean the forum is throwing down the gauntlet to government to come up with an action plan? I don't know."

Morton said Thursday's discussion among the forum's science committee and the article's authors was intense and seemed to reflect a pro-salmon farm bias on the part of the forum's representatives.

"It was supposed to be just a look at the science. They were very reluctant to admit there were no flaws they could find with the paper," Morton said in a telephone interview
.

ssimpson@png.canwest.com

© The Vancouver Sun 2008
 
Survival rates of wild fish dropping by as much as 50 per cent each generation, research shows

MARK HUME Salmon farms killing wild stocks: study

E-mail Mark Hume | Read Bio | Latest Columns
February 12, 2008

VANCOUVER -- Salmon farms are having a negative impact on wild stocks globally, in many cases causing survival rates to drop by more than 50 per cent per generation, according to a new study being released today.

The research by Jennifer Ford and the late Ransom Myers, both of Dalhousie University in Halifax, is the first to examine the impact of salmon farming on such a wide scale.

It compared the marine survival of wild salmon in areas with salmon farming to adjacent areas that didn't have farms - and it found wild stocks are suffering wherever they are in contact with salmon farms.

"We show a reduction in survival or abundance of Atlantic salmon, sea trout and pink, chum, and coho salmon in association with increased production of farmed salmon. In many cases, these reductions in survival or abundance are greater than 50 per cent," the researchers say.
The paper describes the overall impact of salmon farming as "significant and negative."

In order to determine the collective effects of aquaculture on wild fish, the researchers studied five species of wild salmon and trout in five regions of Europe and Canada, including areas in British Columbia, New Brunswick, Nova Scotia and Newfoundland.

The peer-reviewed paper, published by the Public Library of Science, states that generally Atlantic salmon populations were depressed more than Pacific salmon populations, possibly because Atlantics are more susceptible to genetic effects. "The impact of salmon farming on wild salmon and trout is a hotly debated issue in all countries where salmon farms and wild salmon coexist," the researchers say.

"Studies have clearly shown that escaped farm salmon breed with wild populations to the detriment of the wild stocks, and that diseases and parasites are passed from farm to wild salmon. An understanding of the importance of these impacts at the population level, however, has been lacking.

"In this study, we used existing data on salmon populations to compare survival of salmon and trout that swim past salmon farms early in their life cycle with the survival of nearby populations that are not exposed to salmon farms," the study says.

"Many of the salmon populations we investigated are at dramatically reduced abundance, and reducing threats to them is necessary for their survival.

Reducing impacts of salmon farming on wild salmon should be a high priority."

The researchers state that it is "very unlikely" that factors other than salmon farming could explain the widespread declines.

"It's very significant research. It's basically the first time anybody has put the global data together," John Reynolds, who holds a chair in salmon conservation at B.C.'s Simon Fraser University, said yesterday in commenting on the paper, called "A Global Assessment of Salmon Aquaculture Impacts on Wild Salmonids."

Prof. Reynolds said the study by Ms. Ford and Dr. Myers (who died last year) makes it clear that changes need to be made in the way salmon farms operate.

"Frankly, it's surprising to me," Prof. Reynolds said of the study's conclusions.

"It's a stronger result than I would have anticipated."

Prof. Reynolds, who serves as a scientific adviser to the provincially funded B.C. Pacific Salmon Forum, which is researching the impact of salmon farming in the province's Broughton Archipelago, said the study clearly shows aquaculture is having an impact. "It tells me we really are going to have to think about the way we are doing salmon farming," he said.

"I don't think we have to give it up. But people will have to make some choices."

Recent data released by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans show that the numbers of wild pink salmon in the Broughton Archipelago this year are similar to last year's.

But Prof. Reynolds said wild salmon populations fluctuate from one year to the next, and the important thing is the overall trend in areas with farms.

"The strength of this study is that it puts everything together," he said
 
Back
Top