Closed Containment: An Opening for Salmon Farming?

BC’s Special Committee on Sustainable Aquaculture was charged with the nearly impossible task of finding an environmentally responsible way for the salmon farming industry to function profitably in the West Coast’s rich and vulnerable marine ecology. Given the complexity and challenges of the issue, the committee’s principle recommendation for ocean-based closed containment systems was the wisest option.

And the issue is complicated and challenging. Salmon farmers are inclined to dismiss the extent of their impact on the marine environment by associating their activity with land-based farming, rather forgetting that the progressive expropriation of terrestrial ecologies to produce humanity’s ever-increasing food requirements now occupies about one-third of the dry surface of the planet. The ecological effects have been catastrophic.

With the relatively small intrusion of aquaculture on BC’s coast, we are now beginning to record the same impact on our marine environment. The recent drowning in one incident of 51 California sea lions in the predator nets of a Tofino Inlet fish farm measures the severity of the problem. So far in 2007, 110 sea lions have drowned in Creative Salmon’s nets. The total drownings in 2006 was 46. In April, a Pacific white sided dolphin, a harbour porpoise and a Stellar sea lion were entangled and drowned in nets in Mainstream Canada’s Wehlis Bay farm in the Broughton Archipelago. And these are just a few of the counted fatalities — salmon farmers are only required to report the animals they’ve shot — a superficial indication of the traumatic effect of fish farms on marine wildlife.

And the fecal pollution from fish farms is immense. The transfer of diseases to and from wild fish is known. Escaped exotic Atlantic salmon do spawn in West Coast rivers and streams, with recorded deleterious effects. The potentially devastating spread of sea lice from salmon farms to migrating wild smolts is nearly a scientific certainty. The predicted trajectory of ecological impact on the marine environment by salmon farming is comparable to agriculture’s historical impact on terrestrial ecologies.

The excuse we could use 10,000 years ago was ignorance. In these days of scientific study and careful ecological monitoring, we can no longer use that excuse.

At a meeting in Alert Bay in January, 2007, scientists from Norway, Ireland, Nova Scotia and BC gathered to examine the impact of salmon farming on wild fish stocks. The meeting was noteworthy because it represented those countries most experienced with the environmental effects of salmon farming. Three of those scientists subsequently met with the Special Committee. According to the studies of Jennifer Ford, one of the Canadian scientists in attendance, a 1 percent decline in survival of wild salmon occurs on a worldwide basis for every 1,000 tonnes of farm salmon produced (Strait Talk, Spring ‘07, or see the Committee’s transcript).

This is the kind of perspective that gives credence to public concern and weight to the recommendations of the Special Committee. If BC’s salmon farming industry is to thrive and supply continued employment to coastal BC, then it must find an operative framework that brings it into compliance with sustainable ecological principles. Uncontained fecal waste production, disease and parasite transfer, benthic mercury contamination, wildlife kills and a litany of miscellaneous environmental damage is no longer a tolerable option for an industry that must function in a world of growing environmental sensitivity.

Supporters of salmon farming are not being helpful when they claim that the Special Committee is trying to shut down the industry and destroy jobs. Such a simplistic and myopic response merely undermines the possibility of developing a model, world-class system that could export technology and expertise internationally.

Yes, as Clare Backman of Marine Harvest correctly contends, ocean-based closed containment systems are still unproven. “This technology isn’t out there being operated...somewhere that we could go and look at it or even buy it off the shelf,” he says (C.R. Mirror, May 23/07). But he also concedes that, “The science still is, to some degree, undecided.” This reluctant admission of possibility is the potential that the Special Committee has also sensed and is encouraging with its recommendations. As the Committee’s chair Robin Austin pointed out, the industry has met other technological challenges, and with the help of provincial and federal funding, could possibly meet this one, too.

In the same optimistic spirit, North Island MLA, Claire Trevena, adds, “We’re not talking a fantasy world in this report, we’re talking about something that’s very realistic and has already started to be endorsed by the ministry” (Ibid.). She envisions “a strong industry” in the future, presumably with an environmental record for which all British Columbians can be proud.

This pride is clearly echoed by virtually everyone speaking for salmon farming. Doren Anderson, who operates Netloft, a business that builds and services nets for fish farms, claims that BC is a recognized world leader in environmentally responsible practices. Even companies from Norway, where salmon farming originated, “look to Canada as a leader in environmental safeguards in aquaculture” (Ibid.).

The Special Committee’s report is visionary. But it is connected to real and discernible possibilities. The time has come to give serious consideration to ocean based closed containment systems. Presently, they seem too expensive and too inefficient. But new engineering may be able to utilize tidal flow in unforseen ways, and accrued savings in reduced mortality, predation, lice control, and net inspection and repairs, coupled with more accessible locations and lowered ransportation and energy costs, may make salmon farming a truly modern industry. The possibility xists. Why don’t we show the world what we really can do!