next message in archive
next message in thread
previous message in archive
previous message in thread
Index of Subjects
Index of Subjects To: all From: John Sollows Date: Nov. 4/12 (Hi, Dave!) Cannot resist chiming in, having spent most of my working life involved with low-tech aquaculture for the benefit of the poor in less favoured societies. I never did like salmonid culture much for two reasons: (1) Salmonids are carnivorous, so my vision of aquaculture as a reliever of pressure on wild stocks is not likely to be realized by culture of same. More the reverse. (2) My vision of aquaculture as a producer of high-quality protein for poor people is similarly not likely to be met by salmonids, which are relatively pricey. Thirty years ago, I didn't foresee sufficiently the potential of large-scale farms to pollute, but did feel very uncomfortable about introduction of Atlantic salmon to B.C. because they were exotics , with all the invasive potential that that might imply. I belong to an environmental group which does not support cage culture of salmonids and I personally support that stand. But more importantly, I feel strongly opposed to the rapid expansion currently underway. A few cages in an embayment may cause no noticeable harm, but things can change enormously if the size of the operation is increased tenfold, and I find proposals to drop tens of cages into virgin sites foolhardy and irresponsible. The sermon I always preached to anyone considering aquaculture always included the following: "Start small," and that should apply as strongly here as in the Third World. Isn't this just common sense, or am I missing something? And common sense aside, horror stories exist already of what may happen after an operation gets very large. We can argue till the cows come home about whether or not subsequent disasters are due to overly rapid expansion, and the naysayers can (somewhat disingenuously) shout that there is no evidence that there is a cause-and-effect relationship, but sometimes, common sense and experience similar to those discussed in the paper you quote, Dave, should carry the day. Time to shut up, for now! -----Original Message----- From: naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca [mailto:naturens-owner@chebucto.ns.ca] On Behalf Of David Patriquin Sent: November-04-12 10:03 AM To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca; James W. Wolford Cc: NatureNS Subject: Re: [NatureNS] re West coast:Fw: Farmed Salmon The paper by by Ford and Myers 2008 is relevant: "Since the late 1980s, wild salmon catch and abundance have declined dramatically in the North Atlantic and in much of the northeastern Pacific south of Alaska. In these areas, there has been a concomitant increase in the production of farmed salmon. Previous studies have shown negative impacts on wild salmonids, but these results have been difficult to translate into predictions of change in wild population survival and abundance. We compared marine survival of salmonids in areas with salmon farming to adjacent areas without farms in Scotland, Ireland, Atlantic Canada, and Pacific Canada to estimate changes in marine survival concurrent with the growth of salmon aquaculture. Through a meta-analysis of existing data, 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%. Meta-analytic estimates of the mean effect are significant and negative, suggesting that salmon farming has reduced survival of wild salmon and trout in many populations and countries." The effects were largest for the Bay of Fundy. Jennifer S. Ford*, Ransom A. Myers? A Global Assessment of Salmon Aquaculture Impacts on Wild Salmonids 2008 in PlosBiology - the full paper is available here: http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info%3Adoi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pbio.00600 33 Quoting "James W. Wolford" <jimwolford@eastlink.ca>: > Interesting notes, Dave, and I'm responding off the top of my biased > head from that West, namely central B.C. I am biased about > open-net- pen salmon farming which is so wrong in so many ways. But I > think we in the East have a lot to learn from the history and > experiences of the salmon-farming industry in New Brunswick, about > which we in Nova Scotia seldom hear much, even from CBC News and > Maritime Noon etc. There is a lot of knowledge and expertise in > the Conservation Council of New Brunswick, especially Inka Milewsky? > who traveled to Shelburne in attempt to let the people in SW NS > communities the on-going environmental effects of salmon feedlots. > Also the history of the Inner Bay of Fundy Salmon should be somewhat > instructive in the chronology of the sharp demise from > 40,000 adults in various rivers in 1989? to less than 200 (100?) now. > (Figures from a sign in Miner's Marsh in Kentville from the Atlantic > Salmon Federation et al.) Finally, Jim Gourlay, who published the > magazine Eastern Woods and Waters for a long time, is very > knowledgeable about wild salmon as well as the history of salmon > farming in the Bay of Fundy. > > Cheers? from Jim in Burn's Lake, B.C. > -------------------- > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: David & Alison Webster <dwebster@glinx.com> >> Date: November 3, 2012 9:10:52 PM ADT >> To: NatureNS@chebucto.ns.ca >> Subject: [NatureNS] West coast:Fw: Farmed Salmon >> Reply-To: naturens@chebucto.ns.ca >> >> Dear All, Nov 3, 2012 >> Further to my e-mail of June 9, I happened recently to run into >> an article about salmon on the West Coast (Natural History 104(9): >> 26-39,1995). At that time fluctuations over a 100+ year period >> seemed to be reasonably well explained by cyclical changes in >> weather, wind and ocean currents. >> >> With respect to Chinook salmon on the west coast there was "...a >> period of sustained harvest from 1889 to 1920, the period from 1921 >> to 1958 was one of sharp decline and from 1959 to the present we >> had a period of persistent salmon depletion."; page 31. On page 34 >> there is mention of a cool wet period from the 1960s to the 1980s >> when stocks briefly increased. 1920 to 1950 was a hot dry period; a >> time of sharp decline. Note from the 50s onward there was >> cumulative habitat degradation from logging. >> >> In contrast, Salmon farming started in BC in the early 70s. >> http://www.farmedanddangerous.org/solutions/industry-reform/history- in-bc/ >> Note that the period of steep decline over 37 years all took place >> before salmon farming started. And the period of modest increase >> was after farming started. >> >> Perhaps, with respect to salmon farming, crap is not >> exclusively under salmon pens; some may be abou