I actually enjoyed reading that. Its is for me anyway entertaining to read this stuff because from article to article there is always some variances that don't add up suggesting to me that while these writers seem to have done their home work overall they do not have a clue. Never the less the article does shed light on an interesting project with an interesting species but for me its to much of "its not that we are so good its that others are so bad, thats why we are so awesome".
Thats a great jingle about the char liking high densities. I may well be true but I feel that it is likely not far from the truth for atlantic farming. Of course there are no densities mentioned so one can not compare the two. And once again there is no mention of feed content or sources. Its ok I get it, the article isn't written for actual fish farmers to read so it is likely going to flex the details some what and leave the reader to a"blind trust" of the facts.
I will say this tho, I do agree that open pen chinook farming in the north pacific isn't a bad choice. I agree with that. I do see nothing wrong with farming char in closed containment. Lucky guy to have access to that spring water particularly in that dry climate. Looks like the future in closed containment fish farming would be finding fresh spring water. I wonder what that would look like once that starts meeting demand.