Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[liketofish]

Sockeye run is so strong this year. It is an enigma for most lay men to understand why one year is so disastrous and the next a bonanza. The ocean? Fish farms? FN? Habitat? Not sure which one can explain this huge difference one year from the next. I personally suspect that it is perhaps the predation by mackerals. Perhaps they were up in the northern oceans by the billions last year due to warm current and they gobbled up young sockeyes last year. But why pinks were so good last year? I am out of wits. Any body with a better explanation? This is much harder than math 101 to figure out ...LOL.    So do we still need that expensive judicial inquiry ordered by Harper in view of this year's bonanza sockeye run? Sockeye in trouble? What trouble? 

[gordc]

Well at the very least the huge run should impact Alexandria Morton's credibility.  Her claim that the salmon farms will cause the extinction of our salmon is unfounded. British Columbian Salmon farming has negatively impacted the Alaskan fishery's sales as it has stolen some of the market share.  Ms. Morton (an American BTW) is funded by the Alaskan fishery and therfore will will say/do anything possible to regain sales (Dollars) for the Americans regardless of who she impacts and regardless of the facts.  Pretty hard to blame the salmon farms when we have a sockeye return like this as well as the pink run last year. 

[farley]

Hi All I was just looking at the test sets for the month of August 1-23 for the last 15 years quite the eye opener as well the Chinook
2001 ,6539 sockeye 1239 chinook.1995 257 sockeye 421 chinook From 1998 to 2002 they were strong counts so we have to figure out what happened to the sockeye from 2003 to this year.  It would be good to know why this happened.            Farley

[BigFisher]

This 4 year cycle has always been a good run the last couple decades, 2002 and 2006 had high returns.

Im trying to find this article that could answer your question, hmm may take awhile.

[Morty]

Since you've asked for guesses - mine is that many of the fish we're seeing a 5 year olds that stayed out in the ocean an extra year.  The returns are more similar to 2005 than to 2006.

As to Alexandra's reputation:  I think the farmers reputation is more damaged because As I recall they were claimiing climate change and warmer oceans as their reasoning for lower returns.  Unless these present fish found some different cooler pacific ocean that the one the farmers were referring to then that theory is gone with the last tide.

[alwaysfishn]

Well at the very least the huge run should impact Alexandria Morton's credibility.  Her claim that the salmon farms will cause the extinction of our salmon is unfounded. British Columbian Salmon farming has negatively impacted the Alaskan fishery's sales as it has stolen some of the market share.  Ms. Morton (an American BTW) is funded by the Alaskan fishery and therfore will will say/do anything possible to regain sales (Dollars) for the Americans regardless of who she impacts and regardless of the facts.  Pretty hard to blame the salmon farms when we have a sockeye return like this as well as the pink run last year. 

Possibly because of Morton's campaign the fish farms have taken extra care to kill the sea lice in their pens as the sockeye smolts were passing by 4 or 5 years ago.  One good year does not mean everything is Hunky Dory with the salmon.....  Let's wait till after we have 4 or 5 years of good returns before we start slamming Morton and praising fish farms, ok?

As far as the Alaskan fisheries, you could make the same argument about the fish farms. It could be argued that it's in their best interest to kill as many wild salmon as possible so that the fish farms could have more market share.....   

[Fish Assassin]

It's only one year.  It could just a blip, let's hope not. Let's see the results for the next decade before arriving at any conclusion.

[canso]

every 100 years there is a cold water phenomenon that brings cold water and feed from the north.
it happens for about 10 years and we are at the very beginning.
I wish I could find the article I read.
It would also explain the herring run, and the whales that came threw early in the season.

[jon5hill]

Favorable marine conditions for out-migrating juvenile sockeye salmon combined with strong upwelling in the Spring of 2008 has produced an excellent run of Sockeye salmon this year. These are of course 2 of a whole bunch of variables involved that all contribute together, so there are no isolated single reasons why. Some factors contribute more than others. Alexandra Morton's credibility shouldn't be changed for this exact reason. The work done by Dr. Krkosek and Dr. Morton have indeed alleviated some of the parasitic impacts on juvenile salmon as they pass by fish farms due to pesticide use, but to say that Alexandra Morton's message is that fish farms are the only factor involved is simply not true. They are just one of many negative impacts humans have caused salmon populations in BC - the emphasis is placed on them because they are something we have immediate control over and can resolve (land based farming). Creating giant marine reserves, stopping commercial fishing altogether, culling all marine predators of salmon, stopping all pollution into the marine environment.. etc are all very large intangible goals that we need paradigm shifts in thinking to achieve if they are even necessary. Moving fish farms to closed containment can happen in less than a year. This is the reason why the emphasis is placed on it. Not because it's purported to be the "only" factor contributing to salmon population decline in BC.

[gordc]

I'm not trying to say that everything is right in the world now.  My point is that wild salmon and salmon farms can co-exist.

[alwaysfishn]

I'm not trying to say that everything is right in the world now.  My point is that wild salmon and salmon farms can co-exist.

That's not even close to what your previous post suggested. 

However I agree that wild salmon and salmon farms can exist as well. As long as we let the wild salmon have the oceans and put the farmed salmon in pens on the oceans beaches.... 

[Gooey]

gordc...have you seen the pics and videos from brougton archipeligo...have you seen the lice loads on those outward migrating smolts?!?  

After seeing those videos, I think an individual has 2 choices: you believe the information as factual and realize we are KILLING SALMON by having fish farms on migration paths OR you think those pictures, videos, and research are bogus.

I would have to say I do believe we can't have open net pens on migration paths and Gord I think you are 100% wrong.  PS - did you bother reading anything on the pink salmon collapse in the Broughton...I am pretty sure you will see the pinks bounced back when they moved the pens...ie AWAY from wild smolts migration paths....kinda indicates that farms and wild fish CANT co-exisist wouldnt you say?

Back to the question at hand...I know some research was being done on euphauciids populations as an indicator to salmon run health...strong euphaicid numbers = lots of feed = strong returns.  Keep in mind what ever it was that is responsible for this year's run, it propbably occured 2+ years back.  As well, I am pretty sure sockeye feed primarily on euphausiids (krill) hence their deep red flesh, not so much bait fish so sockeye run health maye be very closely matched to krill populations.  

[jon5hill]

Ms. Morton (an American BTW) is funded by the Alaskan fishery and therfore will will say/do anything possible to regain sales (Dollars) for the Americans regardless of who she impacts and regardless of the facts.  Pretty hard to blame the salmon farms when we have a sockeye return like this as well as the pink run last year. 

Actually, Alexandra Morton is not funded by any interest groups in particular, this is entirely untrue. She has stated multiple times that she cut herself off of this support system as it's the same story as the farms themselves - absolute power corrupts absolutely. The research done in the Broughton several years ago was independent science, funded by the national sciences and engineering research council (NSERC). I was up there for 2 months this spring staying at the research station Alexandra built, collecting data for a couple of studies. One of the studies involved zooplankton populations and how they relate to juvenile salmon diet. This is a study funded in part by the department of fisheries and oceans. To claim that all research done in the Broughton by Alexandra Morton is partisan and funded by interest groups is simply not true. Most people credit Alexandra completely for the research that has been conducted up there, but she isn't the first author on the most highly regarded papers that were published. Governor General's Gold Medal winner Dr. Martin Krkosek is the mathematical ecologist who suggested local extinction for the Broughton pinks. When pink numbers plummeted there was a push for increased pesticide use, and a fallow year occurred where the farms produced no salmon whatsoever. The pinks came back strong the following cycle. Is this direct evidence that fish farms wipe out runs? No. It suggests that could be the case, but that's how scientific understanding works. Hypotheses needs to withstand the test of time before they become theory/law.

[jon5hill]

Back to the question at hand...I know some research was being done on euphauciids populations as an indicator to salmon run health...strong euphaicid numbers = lots of feed = strong returns.  Keep in mind what ever it was that is responsible for this year's run, it propbably occured 2+ years back.  As well, I am pretty sure sockeye feed primarily on euphausiids (krill) hence their deep red flesh, not so much bait fish so sockeye run health maye be very closely matched to krill populations.  

Years with strong upwelling bring nutrients from the deep, producing a cascade of productivity starting at phytoplankton and moving upwards. These seasonal increases in feed, when timed for the Spring, produce robust, healthy salmon populations. Once juveniles reach a certain size they are significantly less likely to die from predation. If there is a rich food source in the ocean for the juveniles to meet with when they reach the marine environment, they will grow faster, and become more hardy sooner than if there was not, removing them from a large degree of predation risk. Coastal upwelling also escalates other bait-fish populations by the same mechanisms, so natural predators of salmon have a larger prey field with multiple targets. Add these 2 factors together and you can see how geologic parameters can influence salmon numbers greatly. However, we don't have our hands on the lever that controls ocean upwelling - we do, however, have our hands on the laws that enable open-pen salmon aquaculture which, as illustrated by a number of highly regarded scientists, very visibly negatively impact wild salmon populations.

[Gooey]

Dr. Martin Krkosek is the mathematical ecologist who suggested local extinction for the Broughton pinks. When pink numbers plummeted there was a push for increased pesticide use, and a fallow year occurred where the farms produced no salmon whatsoever. The pinks came back strong the following cycle. Is this direct evidence that fish farms wipe out runs?

Thats good enough for me!  Move the farms onto land or at bare minimum, away from the migration paths of BC's wild salmon.

PS - Jon, thanks for 2 good postings.