Salmon farming in BC explained
An editorial last week in the Times Colonist newspaper from Victoria- the capitol of British Columbia- suggested that scientific information about the salmon farming industry in British Columbia is withheld by the federal government which has “muzzled its scientists”. The paper concludes its editorial by stating that “We are not stating flatly that fish farms are harmful — they are a significant component of B.C.’s economy, worth more than $400 million (~€ 268.4 million) in 2012. They produced more than 73,000 tonnes of fish that year, compared to 9,000 tonnes harvested in the wild salmon fishery. Done properly and safely, aquaculture can be a reliable food supply. But we need to be sure they are safe. Further research into the impacts of aquaculture will not only help protect the wild salmon fishery, it could be beneficial to the long-term viability of the fish-farm industry”.
The criticism seems to be unjustified if one takes a look at the semi-annual publication Canadian Aquaculture R&D Review- the latest of which was issued in 2013 by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) in partnership with the Aquaculture Association of Canada. This latest review “contains over 220 project descriptions detailing an impressive range of topics, disciplines, species and geography”. The document is easily found on the Department’s web site, and DFO states that it “has a mandate to enable the sustainable development of Canada’s aquatic resources, including aquaculture, and to provide access to information on its scientific activities underway within the department and elsewhere in Canada”. Pretty much any project involving aquaculture research and federal scientists will find its way into this publication.
It is therefore frustrating to read the kind of comments provided by one Fiona Chambers following the Times Colonist editorial. She writes: “I grew up on the B.C. coast, where I still live, and my family has been here since the 1880s. I am so utterly and completely staggered by the federal government’s decision to allow more fish farms in B.C. waters that I am reeling. Given the clear scientific evidence over the past few years regarding the risks to our struggling wild salmon stocks posed by these (mostly foreign-owned) companies, I cannot understand the logic behind this announcement. What was the point of spending all that taxpayer money and government time on the Cohen Commission if the result is just to open up B.C.’s waters to a massive expansion of these farms? I am afraid that I am left with no logical conclusion except that our prime minister appears to have sold out the long-term interests of Canadians for short-term economic or political gain”.
The Cohen Commission was established to look into the reasons for an unexpected low return of sockeye salmon to the Fraser River in 2009. By the time the Commission was set up, an equally unexpected 100-year record run (over 30 million by most counts) of the same salmon came back to spawn in the same river the following year.
But as is the case most of the time, saner minds will eventually prevail. In a second letter to the same publication, also posted today, one Dr. Wayne Dwernychuk suggested that nature- rather than salmon farms- is responsible for fluctuations in salmon runs. He writes that “The editorial does not correctly identify what Justice Bruce Cohen found to be the most likely factor for the poor survival of 2009 Fraser River sockeye. This direct quote, taken from the final report, states with no ambiguity what Cohen deemed responsible: “I am also satisfied that marine conditions in both the Strait of Georgia and Queen Charlotte Sound in 2007 were likely to be the primary factors responsible for the poor returns in 2009. Abnormally high freshwater discharge, warmer-than-usual sea surface temperatures, strong winds and lower-than-normal salinity may have resulted in abnormally low phytoplankton and nitrate concentrations that could have led to poor zooplankton [food for sockeye] production.” Cohen’s statement alone is as close as one will ever get to a smoking gun — and it was held by Mother Nature. It is truly unfortunate that selective reading of the final report fostered misconceptions of responsibility”.
And Colleen Dane, Communications Manager B.C. Salmon Farmers Association provided an industry perspective in response to the Times Colonist editorial: “The editorial makes some important points about salmon farming, but we want to address a lingering misconception that a “moratorium” has been lifted on the entire B.C. coast. While a delay in site-amendment application processing was in place during the Cohen Commission, this delay has now ended, aside from a small area identified by Cohen as requiring more research where a moratorium is now in place. Most applications the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has on file were submitted before the Cohen Commission began. The acceptance of an application is the first step in a long, complex process, and this return to business does not mean there will be a flood of new applications or rapid expansion.
However, we do believe that well-managed growth is a good thing because of the reasons outlined in the editorial. Salmon farming is a significant component of B.C.’s economy. Done properly and safely, aquaculture is a reliable and healthy food supply that helps to conserve our oceans. We agree that government policy and regulations should be science-based and accept Cohen’s conclusion that while he found no evidence that salmon farms were impacting Fraser River sockeye, more data was needed to confirm his findings. This is why B.C.’s salmon farmers are supportive of and co-operating with new research on wild salmon in British Columbia. Allowing site-amendment applications to proceed will enable our member companies to continue doing business in B.C., setting the standard for environmental protection and sustainability while raising a world-class, in-demand and delicious food”.
