Salmon aquaculture in the Pacific Northwest: A global industry with local impacts

Environment

Volumn 45, Issue 8, 2003, Pages 18-39

  Naylor, Rosamond L ^a   Eagle, Josh ^a   Smith, Whitney L ^a  

^a STANFORD UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AQUACULTURE; CANADA; ECOLOGY; ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT; INDUSTRY; PACIFIC OCEAN; PISCICULTURE; REVIEW; SALMON; UNITED STATES;

EID: 0141706681     PISSN: 00139157     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1080/00139150309604562     Document Type: Review

References (127)

1. Food and Agricultural Organization of the United Nations (FAO), Fishery Statistical Databases, Aquaculture Production: Ouantities 1950-2001, accessible via http://www.fao.org/fi/statist/FISOFT/FISHPLUS.asp.
2. FAO, Fishery Statistical Databases, Total Production 1950-2001, accessible via http://www.fao.org/fi/statist/FISOFT/FISHPLUS.asp.
3. For example, claims are made that salmon farms act like floating reefs, providing habitat for hundreds of types of invertebrates and plants. See British Columbia Salmon Farmers Association (BCSFA), "Fact Sheets," (Campbell River. B.C.: 2002); and T. Needham, "Farmed Atlantic Salmon in the Pacific Northwest," Bulletin of the Aquaculture Association of Canada 95, no. 4 (1995): 38-41.
4. For example, claims are made that salmon farms act like floating reefs, providing habitat for hundreds of types of invertebrates and plants. See British Columbia Salmon Farmers Association (BCSFA), "Fact Sheets," (Campbell River. B.C.: 2002); and T. Needham, "Farmed Atlantic Salmon in the Pacific Northwest," Bulletin of the Aquaculture Association of Canada 95, no. 4 (1995): 38-41.
5. National Research Council, Sustaining Marine Fisheries (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999); and J. B. C. Jackson et al., "Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of Coastal Ecosystems," Science, 27 July 2001, 629-38.
6. National Research Council, Sustaining Marine Fisheries (Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1999); and J. B. C. Jackson et al., "Historical Overfishing and the Recent Collapse of Coastal Ecosystems," Science, 27 July 2001, 629-38.
7. R. L. Naylor et al., "Effect of Aquaculture on World Fish Supplies," Nature, 29 June 2000, 1017-24; and R. J. Goldburg, M. S. Elliott, and R. L. Naylor, Marine Aquaculture in the United States: Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Arlington, Va.: Pew Oceans Commission, 2001), accessible via http://www.pewoceans.org/reports/137PEWAquacultureF. pdf.
8. R. L. Naylor et al., "Effect of Aquaculture on World Fish Supplies," Nature, 29 June 2000, 1017-24; and R. J. Goldburg, M. S. Elliott, and R. L. Naylor, Marine Aquaculture in the United States: Environmental Impacts and Policy Options (Arlington, Va.: Pew Oceans Commission, 2001), accessible via http://www.pewoceans.org/reports/137PEWAquacultureF. pdf.
9. There is a large debate on the relative health benefits of wild versus farm salmon. Some studies have shown that farm salmon have a higher fat content and a different, less beneficial fatty acid composition than wild salmon. See R. George and R. Bhopal, "Fat Composition of Free-Living and Farmed Species: Implications for Human Diet and Sea-Farming Techniques," British Food Journal 97, no, 8 (1995): 19-22; also T. van Vliet and M. Katan, "Lower Ratio of n-3 to n-6 Fatty Acids in Cultured than in Wild Fish," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 51 (1990): 1-2. Limited tests have also shown that farm salmon contain more dangerous chemical substances than fish that feed in the wild. See M. Easton, D. Luszniak, and E. Von der Geest, "Preliminary Investigation of Contaminant Loadings in Farmed Salmon, Wild Salmon, and Commercial Salmon Feed," Chemosphere 46, no. 7 (2002): 1053-74; and M. Jacobs, A. Covaci, and P. Schepens, "Investigation of Selected Persistent Organic Pollutants in Farmed Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar), Salmon Aquaculture Feed, and Fish Oil Components of the Feed," Environmental Science and Technology 36, no. 13 (2002): 2797-805. Substantial research on these issues is ongoing.
10. There is a large debate on the relative health benefits of wild versus farm salmon. Some studies have shown that farm salmon have a higher fat content and a different, less beneficial fatty acid composition than wild salmon. See R. George and R. Bhopal, "Fat Composition of Free-Living and Farmed Species: Implications for Human Diet and Sea-Farming Techniques," British Food Journal 97, no, 8 (1995): 19-22; also T. van Vliet and M. Katan, "Lower Ratio of n-3 to n-6 Fatty Acids in Cultured than in Wild Fish," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 51 (1990): 1-2. Limited tests have also shown that farm salmon contain more dangerous chemical substances than fish that feed in the wild. See M. Easton, D. Luszniak, and E. Von der Geest, "Preliminary Investigation of Contaminant Loadings in Farmed Salmon, Wild Salmon, and Commercial Salmon Feed," Chemosphere 46, no. 7 (2002): 1053-74; and M. Jacobs, A. Covaci, and P. Schepens, "Investigation of Selected Persistent Organic Pollutants in Farmed Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar), Salmon Aquaculture Feed, and Fish Oil Components of the Feed," Environmental Science and Technology 36, no. 13 (2002): 2797-805. Substantial research on these issues is ongoing.
11. There is a large debate on the relative health benefits of wild versus farm salmon. Some studies have shown that farm salmon have a higher fat content and a different, less beneficial fatty acid composition than wild salmon. See R. George and R. Bhopal, "Fat Composition of Free-Living and Farmed Species: Implications for Human Diet and Sea-Farming Techniques," British Food Journal 97, no, 8 (1995): 19-22; also T. van Vliet and M. Katan, "Lower Ratio of n-3 to n-6 Fatty Acids in Cultured than in Wild Fish," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 51 (1990): 1-2. Limited tests have also shown that farm salmon contain more dangerous chemical substances than fish that feed in the wild. See M. Easton, D. Luszniak, and E. Von der Geest, "Preliminary Investigation of Contaminant Loadings in Farmed Salmon, Wild Salmon, and Commercial Salmon Feed," Chemosphere 46, no. 7 (2002): 1053-74; and M. Jacobs, A. Covaci, and P. Schepens, "Investigation of Selected Persistent Organic Pollutants in Farmed Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar), Salmon Aquaculture Feed, and Fish Oil Components of the Feed," Environmental Science and Technology 36, no. 13 (2002): 2797-805. Substantial research on these issues is ongoing.
12. There is a large debate on the relative health benefits of wild versus farm salmon. Some studies have shown that farm salmon have a higher fat content and a different, less beneficial fatty acid composition than wild salmon. See R. George and R. Bhopal, "Fat Composition of Free-Living and Farmed Species: Implications for Human Diet and Sea-Farming Techniques," British Food Journal 97, no, 8 (1995): 19-22; also T. van Vliet and M. Katan, "Lower Ratio of n-3 to n-6 Fatty Acids in Cultured than in Wild Fish," American Journal of Clinical Nutrition 51 (1990): 1-2. Limited tests have also shown that farm salmon contain more dangerous chemical substances than fish that feed in the wild. See M. Easton, D. Luszniak, and E. Von der Geest, "Preliminary Investigation of Contaminant Loadings in Farmed Salmon, Wild Salmon, and Commercial Salmon Feed," Chemosphere 46, no. 7 (2002): 1053-74; and M. Jacobs, A. Covaci, and P. Schepens, "Investigation of Selected Persistent Organic Pollutants in Farmed Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar), Salmon Aquaculture Feed, and Fish Oil Components of the Feed," Environmental Science and Technology 36, no. 13 (2002): 2797-805. Substantial research on these issues is ongoing.
13. Alaska Department of Fish and Game (ADFG), Alaska Historical Salmon Catches (All Species), 1878-2002, accessible via http://www.cf.adfg. state.ak.us/geninfo/finfish/salmon/catchval/history/all_1878.htm.
14. G. P. Knapp, Challenges and Strategies for the Alaska Salmon Industry (Anchorage: Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska Anchorage, 2002), accessible via http://www.iser. uaa.alaska.edu/iser/people/knapp/Knapp%20Salmon %20Presentation%2001.pdf.
15. National Oceanographic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Draft Code of Conduct for Responsible Aquaculture Development in the U.S. Exclusive Economic Zone. 2002, accessible via http://www.nmfs.noaa.gov/trade/AQ/AQCode.pdf.
16. G. Sylvia, J. L. Anderson, and E. Hanson, "The New World Order in Global Salmon Markets and Aquaculture Development: Implications for Watershed Management in the Pacific Northwest," in E. Knudsen et al., eds., Sustainable Fisheries Management: Pacific Salmon (Boca Raton, Fla.: Lewis Publishers. 2000). 393-405.
17. J. L. Anderson, "The Growth of Salmon Aqualculture and the Emerging New World Order of the Salmon Industry," in Global Trends: Fisheries Management (Bethesda. Md.: American Fisheries Society, 1997), 175-84.
18. FAO, note 1 above.
19. Anderson, note 11 above.
20. Sylvia, Anderson, and Hanson. note 10 above.
21. Knapp, note 8 above.
22. Information for this section is taken from the following six web sites: www.nutreco.com, www.panfish.com, www.stoltnielsen.com, www.fjord.com, www.cermaq.com, and www.weston.com.
23. British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries (MAFF), BC Salmon Aquaculture Industry. (Victoria. B.C.: 2002), accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/bcsalmon_aqua.htm.
24. Anderson, note 11 above.
25. British Columbia Salmon Marketing Council (BCSMC), Salmon Market Database, 2001. accessible via http://www.bcsalmon.ca/database/farm/fmwtyrs.htm; and MAFF, Fisheries Statistics, 2002, accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fish_stats/statistics-aqua.htm.
26. British Columbia Salmon Marketing Council (BCSMC), Salmon Market Database, 2001. accessible via http://www.bcsalmon.ca/database/farm/fmwtyrs.htm; and MAFF, Fisheries Statistics, 2002, accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fish_stats/statistics-aqua.htm.
27. NOAA, Northwest Fisheries Science Center, "The Net-Pen Salmon Farming Industry in the Pacific Northwest," NOAA Technical Memo NMFS-NWFSC-49 (Seattle: 2001).
28. S. Fraser, "World's Largest Salmon Farm Opens in Norway for Scaling Up of Feeding Trials," Growfish News, 11 May 2003, accessible via http://www.growfish.com.au/Grow/Pages/News/2003/may2003/72203.htm.
29. For information on violations and penalties of provincial aquaculture regulations, see the Annual Inspection Report on Marine Finfish Aquaculture Operations, accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/aqua_report/full_report.pdf. New report expected to be available in the fall of 2003.
30. Ministry of Water, Land and Air Protection, Marine Salmon Farming Compliance Report, February 2002, accessible via http://wlapwww.gov.bc.ca/vir/cos/aquarpt01.pdf.
31. Data provided directly by MAFF, Licensing and Compliance Branch.
32. See http://www.innovationstrategy.gc.ca/cmb/innovation.nsf/SectorReports/CAIA.
33. BCSFA, note 3 above.
34. British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office (EAO), "Volume 2: First Nations Perspectives," Salmon Aquaculture Review, (Victoria, B.C., 1997), accessible via http://www.intrafish.com/laws- and-regulations/report_bc/. The term "First Nation" has been adopted by some aboriginal Canadian communities to replace the term "Indian band." (The term "Indian" is viewed as offensive to some people.) Many aboriginal communities in Canada use the term, but some do not; it is a matter of preference for each community. The U.S. term "Native American" is not commonly used in Canada.
35. Farm leases are granted by Land and Water British Columbia, which issues a Crown Land tenure under the Land Act. See http://lwbc.bc.ca/for more information.
36. S. Hume, "We Are Going to Stop These Fish Farms," Vancouver Sun, 1 March 2003. The Heiltsuk First Nation is suing the province and Omega Salmon Group, Ltd., on the grounds that the new Omega hatchery project at Ocean Falls was begun without proper consultation required by law.
37. Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Salmon Licensing (Vancouver, B.C., 2002), accessible via http://www. pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/ops/fm/Salmon/licensing.htm. The Mifflin Plan was implemented in 1996 when Fred Mifflin was the minister of Fisheries and Oceans. His Pacific Salmon Revitalization Plan called for a 50 percent reduction in the number of salmon-fishing licenses on Canada's west coast.
38. Knapp, note 8 above.
39. K. A. Miller and D. L. Fluharty, "El Niño and Variability in the Northeastern Pacific Salmon Fishery: Implications for Coping with Climate Change," in M. Glantz, ed., Climate Variability, Climate Change, and Fisheries (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 49-88. Climatic shifts (for example, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation) create long-term unpredictability in the size of fish stocks; salmon catches in Alaska varied fivefold (30 to 150 million fish) in a 25-year period preceding the 1990s. During the 1990s, average catch in Alaska was more than 175 million fish, see ADFG, Alaska Commercial Salmon Harvests 1970-2001, accessible via http://www. cf.adfg.state. ak.us/geninfo/finfish/salmon/catchval/history/1970-2001s.htm.
40. K. A. Miller and D. L. Fluharty, "El Niño and Variability in the Northeastern Pacific Salmon Fishery: Implications for Coping with Climate Change," in M. Glantz, ed., Climate Variability, Climate Change, and Fisheries (Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press, 1992), 49-88. Climatic shifts (for example, the Pacific Decadal Oscillation) create long-term unpredictability in the size of fish stocks; salmon catches in Alaska varied fivefold (30 to 150 million fish) in a 25-year period preceding the 1990s. During the 1990s, average catch in Alaska was more than 175 million fish, see ADFG, Alaska Commercial Salmon Harvests 1970-2001, accessible via http://www. cf.adfg.state. ak.us/geninfo/finfish/salmon/catchval/history/1970-2001s.htm.
41. Naylor et al., note 5 above; Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor, note 5 above; and D. J. Noakes, R. J. Beamish, and M. L. Kent, "On the Decline of Pacific Salmon and the Speculative Links to Salmon Farming in British Columbia," Aquaculture 183, no. 3-4 (2000):363-86.
42. Naylor et al., note 5 above; Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor, note 5 above; and D. J. Noakes, R. J. Beamish, and M. L. Kent, "On the Decline of Pacific Salmon and the Speculative Links to Salmon Farming in British Columbia," Aquaculture 183, no. 3-4 (2000):363-86.
43. Naylor et al., note 5 above; Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor, note 5 above; and D. J. Noakes, R. J. Beamish, and M. L. Kent, "On the Decline of Pacific Salmon and the Speculative Links to Salmon Farming in British Columbia," Aquaculture 183, no. 3-4 (2000):363-86.
44. Color is controlled using feed additives (canthaxanthin and astaxathin). There has been controversy around the health impacts of these colorant additives. See R. Baker, "Canthaxanthin in Aquafeed Applications: Is there Any Risk?" Trends in Food Science and Technology 12 (2002), 240-43. See also European Commission (EC), Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition, Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition on the Use of Canthaxanthin in Feeding Stuffs for Salmon and Trout, Laying Hens, and Other Poultry, 2002, accessible via http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scan/out81_en. pdf. The EC recommended a reduction of allowable levels of canthaxanthin in animal feed on 27 January 2003. The recommended level lies above the acceptable daily intake of up to 0. 03 milligrams per kilogram of human body weight used by FAO/World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Commission-Scientific Committee on Food (EC-SCF), which has not changed. The only proven side effect of moderate overdosage of canthaxanthin by humans is reversible deposition of crystals in the eye. Substitution of the natural astaxanthin in feeds causes a substantial increase in costs of feed for aquaculture producers. Meanwhile, retailers are required under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to notify consumers of the presence of artificial colorants, regardless of proven health effects. Several grocery store chains face a class action suit for "deceiving the public" and have now agreed to put "color-added" labels on their farm salmon. See also D. Cherry, "Kroger to Label Farmed Salmon; 'Color-Added' Labels Coming this Week," The Wave News Network, 30 April 2003.
45. Color is controlled using feed additives (canthaxanthin and astaxathin). There has been controversy around the health impacts of these colorant additives. See R. Baker, "Canthaxanthin in Aquafeed Applications: Is there Any Risk?" Trends in Food Science and Technology 12 (2002), 240-43. See also European Commission (EC), Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition, Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition on the Use of Canthaxanthin in Feeding Stuffs for Salmon and Trout, Laying Hens, and Other Poultry, 2002, accessible via http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scan/out81_en. pdf. The EC recommended a reduction of allowable levels of canthaxanthin in animal feed on 27 January 2003. The recommended level lies above the acceptable daily intake of up to 0. 03 milligrams per kilogram of human body weight used by FAO/World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Commission-Scientific Committee on Food (EC-SCF), which has not changed. The only proven side effect of moderate overdosage of canthaxanthin by humans is reversible deposition of crystals in the eye. Substitution of the natural astaxanthin in feeds causes a substantial increase in costs of feed for aquaculture producers. Meanwhile, retailers are required under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to notify consumers of the presence of artificial colorants, regardless of proven health effects. Several grocery store chains face a class action suit for "deceiving the public" and have now agreed to put "color-added" labels on their farm salmon. See also D. Cherry, "Kroger to Label Farmed Salmon; 'Color-Added' Labels Coming this Week," The Wave News Network, 30 April 2003.
46. Color is controlled using feed additives (canthaxanthin and astaxathin). There has been controversy around the health impacts of these colorant additives. See R. Baker, "Canthaxanthin in Aquafeed Applications: Is there Any Risk?" Trends in Food Science and Technology 12 (2002), 240-43. See also European Commission (EC), Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition, Opinion of the Scientific Committee on Animal Nutrition on the Use of Canthaxanthin in Feeding Stuffs for Salmon and Trout, Laying Hens, and Other Poultry, 2002, accessible via http://europa.eu.int/comm/food/fs/sc/scan/out81_en. pdf. The EC recommended a reduction of allowable levels of canthaxanthin in animal feed on 27 January 2003. The recommended level lies above the acceptable daily intake of up to 0. 03 milligrams per kilogram of human body weight used by FAO/World Health Organization (WHO) and the European Commission-Scientific Committee on Food (EC-SCF), which has not changed. The only proven side effect of moderate overdosage of canthaxanthin by humans is reversible deposition of crystals in the eye. Substitution of the natural astaxanthin in feeds causes a substantial increase in costs of feed for aquaculture producers. Meanwhile, retailers are required under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act to notify consumers of the presence of artificial colorants, regardless of proven health effects. Several grocery store chains face a class action suit for "deceiving the public" and have now agreed to put "color-added" labels on their farm salmon. See also D. Cherry, "Kroger to Label Farmed Salmon; 'Color-Added' Labels Coming this Week," The Wave News Network, 30 April 2003.
47. Tension between fishers and processors over contracts and prices has always plagued the industry in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska. In May 2003, a major court battle between fishers and processors in Bristol Bay, Alaska, over price fixing ended in a "finding of no liability" verdict for the processors, See D. Cherry, "Bristol Bay Juror: 'There Was Nothing Solid Enough; It Was Too Circumstantial,'" The Wave News Nenvork, 27 May 2003. Fishers typically feel underpaid by processors, and processors commonly complain about fishers' excessive demands, especially in years when the market is weak.
48. ADFG, note 7 above.
49. For example, between 1990 and 2002. average selling prices declined from $273,000 to $20,000 for Prince William Sound purse seine permits, from $216,000 to $20,000 for Bristol Bay drift gillnet permits, and from S110,000 to $23,000 for southeastern Alaska purse seine permits. See Commercial Fisheries Entry Commission, Permit Values, accessible via http://www.cfec.state.ak.us/pmtvalue/mnusalm.htm.
50. Stolt-Nielsen S.A., Annual Report 2001, accessible via the web at http://www.stoltnielsen.com/2001StoltNielsenARpt.pdf.
51. Pan Fish A.S.A., Reduced Production in Scotland, 20 May 2003, accessible via http://www. panfish.com/investors/press/pressreleases.html?id=59.
52. J. Eagle, R. Naylor, and W. Smith, "Why Farm Salmon Outcompete Fishery Salmon," Marine Policy, Fall 2003 (forthcoming).
53. Alaska has declared a State of Emergency for the state's salmon fisheries and has issued a series of disaster relief programs since 1998. Each program has a different payment structure and is aimed at different groups. Current attention is focused mainly on the Yukon-Kuskokwim Delta area where salmon runs and prices are extremely low.
54. S. Colt, The Economic Importance of Healthy Alaska Ecosystems. (Anchorage: Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska Anchorage, 2001).
55. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has been purchasing excess stocks of canned pink salmon for food programs in recent years. USDA purchases of these stocks have almost doubled, from S8 million in 1998 to $15 million in 2003.
56. Eagle, Naylor, and Smith, note 40 above; and Joint Legislative Salmon Industry Task Force, Final Report and Proposed Legislation, 4 February 2003, accessible via http://www.ufafish.org/taskforce/Doc/JLSITFfinalreportcorrected.pdf.
57. Eagle, Naylor, and Smith, note 40 above; and Joint Legislative Salmon Industry Task Force, Final Report and Proposed Legislation, 4 February 2003, accessible via http://www.ufafish.org/taskforce/Doc/JLSITFfinalreportcorrected.pdf.
58. The fish trap is a floating or fixed device positioned across the migration paths of salmon on their spawning runs and designed to lead salmon into a holding section from which escape is virtually impossible. The trap can be opened to permit escapement as desired and can be used to hold fish for a short period of time before processing. Fish wheels consist of two large baskets that turn on an axle. They are rotated by the river current and scoop up passing fish as they turn. Captured fish slide down a chute into a holding box that is emptied several times a day. See R. A. Cooley, Politics and Conservation: The Decline of Alaska Salmon (New York: Harper and Row, 1963); and S. Colt, Salmon Fish Traps in Alaska, (Anchorage: Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska Anchorage, 1999), accessible via http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/publications/fishrep/fishtrap.pdf.
59. The fish trap is a floating or fixed device positioned across the migration paths of salmon on their spawning runs and designed to lead salmon into a holding section from which escape is virtually impossible. The trap can be opened to permit escapement as desired and can be used to hold fish for a short period of time before processing. Fish wheels consist of two large baskets that turn on an axle. They are rotated by the river current and scoop up passing fish as they turn. Captured fish slide down a chute into a holding box that is emptied several times a day. See R. A. Cooley, Politics and Conservation: The Decline of Alaska Salmon (New York: Harper and Row, 1963); and S. Colt, Salmon Fish Traps in Alaska, (Anchorage: Institute of Social and Economic Research, University of Alaska Anchorage, 1999), accessible via http://www.iser.uaa.alaska.edu/publications/fishrep/fishtrap.pdf.
60. The vessel buyback program in Washington began in 1999 and was intended to compensate fishers affected by Pacific Salmon Treaty negotiations The Mifflin plan in British Columbia was implemented in 1996; see note 30 above.
61. H. C. White, "'Sea Lice' (Lepeophtheirus salmonis) and Death of Salmon," Journal of the Fisheries Research Board of Canada 5 (1940): 172-75.
62. A. McVicar, "Disease and Parasite Implications of the Coexistence of Wild and Cultured Atlantic Salmon Populations," ICES Journal of Marine Science 54 (1997): 1093-103; and T. A. Bakke and P. D. Harris, "Disease and Parasites in Wild Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) Populations," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55 (1998): 247-66.
63. A. McVicar, "Disease and Parasite Implications of the Coexistence of Wild and Cultured Atlantic Salmon Populations," ICES Journal of Marine Science 54 (1997): 1093-103; and T. A. Bakke and P. D. Harris, "Disease and Parasites in Wild Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) Populations," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 55 (1998): 247-66.
64. Sea lice epidemics at farm sites commonly precede epidemics in local post-smolt populations. See B. MacKinnon, "Host Factors Important in Sea Lice Infection," ICES Journal of Marine Science 55 (1998): 188-92; A. W. Pike and S. L. Wadsworth, "Sea Lice on Salmonids: Their Biology and Control," Advances in Parasitology 44 (1999): 234-337. The association between sea lice epizootics and intensive aquaculture production has been documented earlier in Ireland, see O. Tully and K. F. Whelan, "Production of Nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from Farmed and Wild Salmon and Its Relation to the Infestation of Wild Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the West Coast of Ireland in 1991," Fisheries Research 17 (1993): 187-200; O. Tully, W. R. Poole, and K. F. Whelan, "Infestation Parameters of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) Parasitic on Sea Trout, Salmo trutta L., off the West Coast of Ireland During 1990 and 1991," Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 24 (1993): 544-45; and O. Tully, P. Gargan, W. R. Pool, and K. F. Whelan, "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Infestation of Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) by the Caligid Copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) in Relation to Sources of Infection in Ireland," Parasitology 119 (1999): 41-51; in Norway, see K. Birkeland, "Consequences of Premature Return by Sea Trout (Salmon trutta) Infested with the Salmon Louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer): Migration, Growth, and Mortality," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (1996): 2808-13; and P. A. Heuch and T. A. Mo, "A Model of Salmon Louse Production in Norway: Effects of Increasing Salmon Production and Public Management Measures," Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 45 (2001): 145-52; and in Scotland. see J. R. A. Butler et al., Patterns of Sea Lice Infestations on Scottish West Coast Sea Trout: Survey Results, 1997-2000. (Scotland, U.K.: Association of West Coast Fisheries Trusts, 2001). Sea lice infection is the second-greatest cause of economic loss to Atlantic salmon farms in Northwestern Europe after infectious salmon anemia: see Pike and Wadsworth, above here.
65. Sea lice epidemics at farm sites commonly precede epidemics in local post-smolt populations. See B. MacKinnon, "Host Factors Important in Sea Lice Infection," ICES Journal of Marine Science 55 (1998): 188-92; A. W. Pike and S. L. Wadsworth, "Sea Lice on Salmonids: Their Biology and Control," Advances in Parasitology 44 (1999): 234-337. The association between sea lice epizootics and intensive aquaculture production has been documented earlier in Ireland, see O. Tully and K. F. Whelan, "Production of Nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from Farmed and Wild Salmon and Its Relation to the Infestation of Wild Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the West Coast of Ireland in 1991," Fisheries Research 17 (1993): 187-200; O. Tully, W. R. Poole, and K. F. Whelan, "Infestation Parameters of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) Parasitic on Sea Trout, Salmo trutta L., off the West Coast of Ireland During 1990 and 1991," Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 24 (1993): 544-45; and O. Tully, P. Gargan, W. R. Pool, and K. F. Whelan, "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Infestation of Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) by the Caligid Copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) in Relation to Sources of Infection in Ireland," Parasitology 119 (1999): 41-51; in Norway, see K. Birkeland, "Consequences of Premature Return by Sea Trout (Salmon trutta) Infested with the Salmon Louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer): Migration, Growth, and Mortality," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (1996): 2808-13; and P. A. Heuch and T. A. Mo, "A Model of Salmon Louse Production in Norway: Effects of Increasing Salmon Production and Public Management Measures," Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 45 (2001): 145-52; and in Scotland. see J. R. A. Butler et al., Patterns of Sea Lice Infestations on Scottish West Coast Sea Trout: Survey Results, 1997-2000. (Scotland, U.K.: Association of West Coast Fisheries Trusts, 2001). Sea lice infection is the second-greatest cause of economic loss to Atlantic salmon farms in Northwestern Europe after infectious salmon anemia: see Pike and Wadsworth, above here.
66. Sea lice epidemics at farm sites commonly precede epidemics in local post-smolt populations. See B. MacKinnon, "Host Factors Important in Sea Lice Infection," ICES Journal of Marine Science 55 (1998): 188-92; A. W. Pike and S. L. Wadsworth, "Sea Lice on Salmonids: Their Biology and Control," Advances in Parasitology 44 (1999): 234-337. The association between sea lice epizootics and intensive aquaculture production has been documented earlier in Ireland, see O. Tully and K. F. Whelan, "Production of Nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from Farmed and Wild Salmon and Its Relation to the Infestation of Wild Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the West Coast of Ireland in 1991," Fisheries Research 17 (1993): 187-200; O. Tully, W. R. Poole, and K. F. Whelan, "Infestation Parameters of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) Parasitic on Sea Trout, Salmo trutta L., off the West Coast of Ireland During 1990 and 1991," Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 24 (1993): 544-45; and O. Tully, P. Gargan, W. R. Pool, and K. F. Whelan, "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Infestation of Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) by the Caligid Copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) in Relation to Sources of Infection in Ireland," Parasitology 119 (1999): 41-51; in Norway, see K. Birkeland, "Consequences of Premature Return by Sea Trout (Salmon trutta) Infested with the Salmon Louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer): Migration, Growth, and Mortality," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (1996): 2808-13; and P. A. Heuch and T. A. Mo, "A Model of Salmon Louse Production in Norway: Effects of Increasing Salmon Production and Public Management Measures," Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 45 (2001): 145-52; and in Scotland. see J. R. A. Butler et al., Patterns of Sea Lice Infestations on Scottish West Coast Sea Trout: Survey Results, 1997-2000. (Scotland, U.K.: Association of West Coast Fisheries Trusts, 2001). Sea lice infection is the second-greatest cause of economic loss to Atlantic salmon farms in Northwestern Europe after infectious salmon anemia: see Pike and Wadsworth, above here.
67. Sea lice epidemics at farm sites commonly precede epidemics in local post-smolt populations. See B. MacKinnon, "Host Factors Important in Sea Lice Infection," ICES Journal of Marine Science 55 (1998): 188-92; A. W. Pike and S. L. Wadsworth, "Sea Lice on Salmonids: Their Biology and Control," Advances in Parasitology 44 (1999): 234-337. The association between sea lice epizootics and intensive aquaculture production has been documented earlier in Ireland, see O. Tully and K. F. Whelan, "Production of Nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from Farmed and Wild Salmon and Its Relation to the Infestation of Wild Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the West Coast of Ireland in 1991," Fisheries Research 17 (1993): 187-200; O. Tully, W. R. Poole, and K. F. Whelan, "Infestation Parameters of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) Parasitic on Sea Trout, Salmo trutta L., off the West Coast of Ireland During 1990 and 1991," Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 24 (1993): 544-45; and O. Tully, P. Gargan, W. R. Pool, and K. F. Whelan, "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Infestation of Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) by the Caligid Copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) in Relation to Sources of Infection in Ireland," Parasitology 119 (1999): 41-51; in Norway, see K. Birkeland, "Consequences of Premature Return by Sea Trout (Salmon trutta) Infested with the Salmon Louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer): Migration, Growth, and Mortality," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (1996): 2808-13; and P. A. Heuch and T. A. Mo, "A Model of Salmon Louse Production in Norway: Effects of Increasing Salmon Production and Public Management Measures," Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 45 (2001): 145-52; and in Scotland. see J. R. A. Butler et al., Patterns of Sea Lice Infestations on Scottish West Coast Sea Trout: Survey Results, 1997-2000. (Scotland, U.K.: Association of West Coast Fisheries Trusts, 2001). Sea lice infection is the second-greatest cause of economic loss to Atlantic salmon farms in Northwestern Europe after infectious salmon anemia: see Pike and Wadsworth, above here.
68. Sea lice epidemics at farm sites commonly precede epidemics in local post-smolt populations. See B. MacKinnon, "Host Factors Important in Sea Lice Infection," ICES Journal of Marine Science 55 (1998): 188-92; A. W. Pike and S. L. Wadsworth, "Sea Lice on Salmonids: Their Biology and Control," Advances in Parasitology 44 (1999): 234-337. The association between sea lice epizootics and intensive aquaculture production has been documented earlier in Ireland, see O. Tully and K. F. Whelan, "Production of Nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from Farmed and Wild Salmon and Its Relation to the Infestation of Wild Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the West Coast of Ireland in 1991," Fisheries Research 17 (1993): 187-200; O. Tully, W. R. Poole, and K. F. Whelan, "Infestation Parameters of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) Parasitic on Sea Trout, Salmo trutta L., off the West Coast of Ireland During 1990 and 1991," Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 24 (1993): 544-45; and O. Tully, P. Gargan, W. R. Pool, and K. F. Whelan, "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Infestation of Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) by the Caligid Copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) in Relation to Sources of Infection in Ireland," Parasitology 119 (1999): 41-51; in Norway, see K. Birkeland, "Consequences of Premature Return by Sea Trout (Salmon trutta) Infested with the Salmon Louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer): Migration, Growth, and Mortality," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (1996): 2808-13; and P. A. Heuch and T. A. Mo, "A Model of Salmon Louse Production in Norway: Effects of Increasing Salmon Production and Public Management Measures," Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 45 (2001): 145-52; and in Scotland. see J. R. A. Butler et al., Patterns of Sea Lice Infestations on Scottish West Coast Sea Trout: Survey Results, 1997-2000. (Scotland, U.K.: Association of West Coast Fisheries Trusts, 2001). Sea lice infection is the second-greatest cause of economic loss to Atlantic salmon farms in Northwestern Europe after infectious salmon anemia: see Pike and Wadsworth, above here.
69. Sea lice epidemics at farm sites commonly precede epidemics in local post-smolt populations. See B. MacKinnon, "Host Factors Important in Sea Lice Infection," ICES Journal of Marine Science 55 (1998): 188-92; A. W. Pike and S. L. Wadsworth, "Sea Lice on Salmonids: Their Biology and Control," Advances in Parasitology 44 (1999): 234-337. The association between sea lice epizootics and intensive aquaculture production has been documented earlier in Ireland, see O. Tully and K. F. Whelan, "Production of Nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from Farmed and Wild Salmon and Its Relation to the Infestation of Wild Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the West Coast of Ireland in 1991," Fisheries Research 17 (1993): 187-200; O. Tully, W. R. Poole, and K. F. Whelan, "Infestation Parameters of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) Parasitic on Sea Trout, Salmo trutta L., off the West Coast of Ireland During 1990 and 1991," Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 24 (1993): 544-45; and O. Tully, P. Gargan, W. R. Pool, and K. F. Whelan, "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Infestation of Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) by the Caligid Copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) in Relation to Sources of Infection in Ireland," Parasitology 119 (1999): 41-51; in Norway, see K. Birkeland, "Consequences of Premature Return by Sea Trout (Salmon trutta) Infested with the Salmon Louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer): Migration, Growth, and Mortality," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (1996): 2808-13; and P. A. Heuch and T. A. Mo, "A Model of Salmon Louse Production in Norway: Effects of Increasing Salmon Production and Public Management Measures," Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 45 (2001): 145-52; and in Scotland. see J. R. A. Butler et al., Patterns of Sea Lice Infestations on Scottish West Coast Sea Trout: Survey Results, 1997-2000. (Scotland, U.K.: Association of West Coast Fisheries Trusts, 2001). Sea lice infection is the second-greatest cause of economic loss to Atlantic salmon farms in Northwestern Europe after infectious salmon anemia: see Pike and Wadsworth, above here.
70. Sea lice epidemics at farm sites commonly precede epidemics in local post-smolt populations. See B. MacKinnon, "Host Factors Important in Sea Lice Infection," ICES Journal of Marine Science 55 (1998): 188-92; A. W. Pike and S. L. Wadsworth, "Sea Lice on Salmonids: Their Biology and Control," Advances in Parasitology 44 (1999): 234-337. The association between sea lice epizootics and intensive aquaculture production has been documented earlier in Ireland, see O. Tully and K. F. Whelan, "Production of Nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from Farmed and Wild Salmon and Its Relation to the Infestation of Wild Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the West Coast of Ireland in 1991," Fisheries Research 17 (1993): 187-200; O. Tully, W. R. Poole, and K. F. Whelan, "Infestation Parameters of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) Parasitic on Sea Trout, Salmo trutta L., off the West Coast of Ireland During 1990 and 1991," Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 24 (1993): 544-45; and O. Tully, P. Gargan, W. R. Pool, and K. F. Whelan, "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Infestation of Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) by the Caligid Copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) in Relation to Sources of Infection in Ireland," Parasitology 119 (1999): 41-51; in Norway, see K. Birkeland, "Consequences of Premature Return by Sea Trout (Salmon trutta) Infested with the Salmon Louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer): Migration, Growth, and Mortality," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (1996): 2808-13; and P. A. Heuch and T. A. Mo, "A Model of Salmon Louse Production in Norway: Effects of Increasing Salmon Production and Public Management Measures," Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 45 (2001): 145-52; and in Scotland. see J. R. A. Butler et al., Patterns of Sea Lice Infestations on Scottish West Coast Sea Trout: Survey Results, 1997-2000. (Scotland, U.K.: Association of West Coast Fisheries Trusts, 2001). Sea lice infection is the second-greatest cause of economic loss to Atlantic salmon farms in Northwestern Europe after infectious salmon anemia: see Pike and Wadsworth, above here.
71. Sea lice epidemics at farm sites commonly precede epidemics in local post-smolt populations. See B. MacKinnon, "Host Factors Important in Sea Lice Infection," ICES Journal of Marine Science 55 (1998): 188-92; A. W. Pike and S. L. Wadsworth, "Sea Lice on Salmonids: Their Biology and Control," Advances in Parasitology 44 (1999): 234-337. The association between sea lice epizootics and intensive aquaculture production has been documented earlier in Ireland, see O. Tully and K. F. Whelan, "Production of Nauplii of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) from Farmed and Wild Salmon and Its Relation to the Infestation of Wild Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) off the West Coast of Ireland in 1991," Fisheries Research 17 (1993): 187-200; O. Tully, W. R. Poole, and K. F. Whelan, "Infestation Parameters of Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) (Copepoda: Caligidae) Parasitic on Sea Trout, Salmo trutta L., off the West Coast of Ireland During 1990 and 1991," Aquaculture and Fisheries Management 24 (1993): 544-45; and O. Tully, P. Gargan, W. R. Pool, and K. F. Whelan, "Spatial and Temporal Variation in the Infestation of Sea Trout (Salmo trutta L.) by the Caligid Copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis (Krøyer) in Relation to Sources of Infection in Ireland," Parasitology 119 (1999): 41-51; in Norway, see K. Birkeland, "Consequences of Premature Return by Sea Trout (Salmon trutta) Infested with the Salmon Louse (Lepeophtheirus salmonis Krøyer): Migration, Growth, and Mortality," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 53 (1996): 2808-13; and P. A. Heuch and T. A. Mo, "A Model of Salmon Louse Production in Norway: Effects of Increasing Salmon Production and Public Management Measures," Diseases of Aquatic Organisms 45 (2001): 145-52; and in Scotland. see J. R. A. Butler et al., Patterns of Sea Lice Infestations on Scottish West Coast Sea Trout: Survey Results, 1997-2000. (Scotland, U.K.: Association of West Coast Fisheries Trusts, 2001). Sea lice infection is the second-greatest cause of economic loss to Atlantic salmon farms in Northwestern Europe after infectious salmon anemia: see Pike and Wadsworth, above here.
72. 2, and roughly 80 percent of the fish produced on these farms were Atlantic salmon, which are highly susceptible to sea lice. See S. C. Johnson, "A Comparison of Development and Growth Rates of Lepeophtheirus salmonis on Naive Atlantic (Salmo salar) and Chinook (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) Salmon," in G. A. Boxshall and D. Defaye, eds., Pathogens of Wild and Farmed Fish: Sea Lice (London, U.K.: Ellis Horwood, 1993), 68-82.
73. Bakke and Harris, note 48 above. The evidence presented in this section on parasite and disease infestations in British Columbia, and on regulatory measures to reduce the infestations, was collected from a long series of e-mail correspondences and Internet reports beginning in the spring of 2001. The correspondence is by industry representatives, government officials, and environmental activists (mainly Alexandra Morton, Raincoast Research, Simoom Sound, B.C.) who have been monitoring the situation.
74. The lethal level of sea lice on juvenile pink salmon is thought to be around three per fish, and in 2001, the number of lice averaged seven per fish.
75. The low adult returns of 2002 were the product of eggs laid in the fall of 2000, and they are the same fish as were migrating out to sea in the spring of 2001. The spring of 2003 has thus become a critical period for the remaining pink salmon population, which are the product of eggs laid in 2002.
76. The PFRCC, created in 1997 as a component of the Canada-British Columbia agreement on the management of Pacific salmon fishery issues, is an independent advisory organization for the conservation of Pacific salmon species. See http://www.fish.bc.ca/for more information.
77. See Figure 4 on page 30. The cluster of inactive farms indicates provincial fallow route. For details of the sea lice action plan, see http://www.agf.gov. bc.ca/fisheries/broughton_sealice_actionplan.htm. In correspondence dated 23 June 2003. Alexandra Morton (see note 51 above) reports that the fallow route was at least a partial success, with lower lice levels this year than in the two previous years. The concern is that potentially infected fish emerging from streams not adjacent to the fallow route are mixing with clean fish as they exit the archipelago ocean-bound.
78. S. Saksida, Investigation of the 2001-2002 IHNV Epizootic in Farmed Atlantic Salmon in British Columbia (Campbell River, B.C.: MAFF, 2002), accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/pdf/IHNV_report.pdf. Areas with IHN-infected sites included the Broughton Archipelago, the east and west coasts of Vancouver Island, and the central mainland coast.
79. Q. Dodd, "Stolt Confirms Second IHN Outbreak in BC," Fish Information & Services, 4 September 2002, accessible via http://www.fis.com.
80. MAFF, "Fish Health Policy Initiatives," accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/health/fish_health_policy_initiatives.htm.
81. R. L. Naylor et al., Fugitive Salmon: A Framework for Assessing Risks of Escaped Fish from Aquaculture. (Stanford University: Center for Environmental Science and Policy (forthcoming)).
82. Atlantic Salmon Watch Program (AWSP), Reported BC Aquaculture Escapes, accessible via http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sci/aqua/ASWP/Atl_escapes.PDF.
83. A. Morton and J. Volpe, "A Description of Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) Captured in the Pacific Salmon Fishery in British Columbia, Canada, in 2000," Alaska Fishery Research Bulletin 9, no. 2 (2003): 102-10.
84. In Pacific streams, Atlantic salmon compete mainly with steelhead trout. Atlantic salmon hatch earlier than steelhead and thus have a prior residency advantage in terms of size and competitive ability. See J. Volpe, B. Anholt, and B. Glickman, "Competition among Juvenile Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) and Steelhead (Onchorhynchus mykiss): Relevance to Invasion Potential in Bdtish Columbia," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58 (2001): 197-207; and J. Volpe, E. Taylor, B. Rimmer, and B. Glickman, "Evidence of Natural Reproduction of Aquaculture-Escaped Atlantic Salmon in a Coastal British Columbia River," Conservation Biology 14, no. 3 (2000) 899-903.
85. In Pacific streams, Atlantic salmon compete mainly with steelhead trout. Atlantic salmon hatch earlier than steelhead and thus have a prior residency advantage in terms of size and competitive ability. See J. Volpe, B. Anholt, and B. Glickman, "Competition among Juvenile Atlantic Salmon (Salmo salar) and Steelhead (Onchorhynchus mykiss): Relevance to Invasion Potential in Bdtish Columbia," Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences 58 (2001): 197-207; and J. Volpe, E. Taylor, B. Rimmer, and B. Glickman, "Evidence of Natural Reproduction of Aquaculture-Escaped Atlantic Salmon in a Coastal British Columbia River," Conservation Biology 14, no. 3 (2000) 899-903.
86. Ibid.: and AWSP, BC Freshwater Adult Atlantic Salmon Captures and Sightings. accessible via http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/sci/aqua/ASWP/BC_FW_Adult.PDF.
87. For example, on 19 June 2003 Senator Lisa Murkowski (R-Alaska) urged the Bush Administration to take steps to prevent invasive species from entering U.S. waters, including tougher measures for aquaculture producers to prevent farm salmon escapes.
88. MAFF, Escape Prevention Initiative (1999), accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/escape/escape_prevention_initiative.htm.
89. Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor. note 5 above; and M. L. Weber, "What Price Farmed Fish: A Review of the Environmental and Social Costs of Farming Carnivorous Fish," prepared for SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse (Providence, R.I.: 2003), accessible via http://www.seaweb.org/resources/sac/pdf/WhatPriceFarmedFish_high.pdf. Industry representatives challenge these numbers as being too high; however, firm-level information on feed inputs is largely proprietary.
90. Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor. note 5 above; and M. L. Weber, "What Price Farmed Fish: A Review of the Environmental and Social Costs of Farming Carnivorous Fish," prepared for SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse (Providence, R.I.: 2003), accessible via http://www.seaweb.org/resources/sac/pdf/WhatPriceFarmedFish_high.pdf. Industry representatives challenge these numbers as being too high; however, firm-level information on feed inputs is largely proprietary.
91. Naylor et al., note 5 above; and Weber, note 66 above.
92. Naylor et al., note 5 above; and Weber, note 66 above.
93. British Columbia Environmental Assessment Office (EAO), "Volume 1: Chapter 8: Interactions with Coastal Mammals and Other Species," Salmon Aquaculture Review (Victoria, B.C.: 1997), accessible via http://www.intrafish.com/laws-and-regulations/report_bc/v1chp8.htm.
94. British Columbia EAO, note 68 above; and G. Iwama, L. Nichol, and J. Ford, "Volume 3: Part E: Aquatic Mammals and Other Species Discussion Paper", Salmon Aquaculture Review (Victoria, B.C., Cananada), accessible via http://www.intrafish.com/laws-and-regulations/report_bc/vol3-e.htm.
95. British Columbia EAO, note 68 above; and G. Iwama, L. Nichol, and J. Ford, "Volume 3: Part E: Aquatic Mammals and Other Species Discussion Paper", Salmon Aquaculture Review (Victoria, B.C., Cananada), accessible via http://www.intrafish.com/laws-and-regulations/report_bc/vol3-e.htm.
96. Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor, note 5 above.
97. I b i d.
98. M. C. M. Beveridge, Cage Aquaculture, 2nd ed. (Edinburgh. Scotland: Fishing News Books. 1996), 346.
99. K. Brooks, An Evaluation of the Relationship between Salmon Farm Biomass, Organic Inputs to Sediments, Physiochemical Changes Associated with Those Inputs and the Infaunal Response-with Emphasis on Total Sediment Sulfides, Total Volatile Solid, and Oxidation-Reduction Potential as Surrogate Endpoints for Biological Monitoring, a report produced for the (then) British Columbia Ministry of the Environment (Port Townsend, Wash.: Aquatic Environmental Sciences, 2001).
100. Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor, note 5 above. The use of chemicals in salmon aquaculture is not well documented, and there are few studies that report whether use is increasing, decreasing, or remaining constant. See C. M. Benbrook, Antibiotic Drug Use in U.S. Aquaculture, (Sandpoint, Idaho: Northwest Science and Environmental Policy Center, 2002).
101. Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor, note 5 above. The use of chemicals in salmon aquaculture is not well documented, and there are few studies that report whether use is increasing, decreasing, or remaining constant. See C. M. Benbrook, Antibiotic Drug Use in U.S. Aquaculture, (Sandpoint, Idaho: Northwest Science and Environmental Policy Center, 2002).
102. NOAA, note 20 above.
103. Naylor et al., note 59 above.
104. Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor, note 5 above; and MAFF, Salmon Aquaculture Policy Framework, (1999). accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/salmon_aqua_policy.htm.
105. Goldburg, Elliott, and Naylor, note 5 above; and MAFF, Salmon Aquaculture Policy Framework, (1999). accessible via http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/salmon_aqua_policy.htm.
106. See the Federal Register's proposed rules by the EPA [FRL-7263-2]. 12 September 2002. EPA's final effluent guidelines are due in June 2004.
107. I b i d.
108. R. Neill and B. Rogers, Canadian Aquaculture: Drowning in Regulation, prepared for the Canadian Aquaculture Institute (Halifax, N.S.: 2002), accessible via http://www.aims.ca/Publications/Aquaculture/aquaculture.pdf.
109. D. Kettl and M. H. Armacost, eds., Environmental Governance: A Report on the Next Generation of Environmental Policy (Washington D.C.: The Brookings Institution, 2002).
110. C. D. Levings, J. M. Helfield, D. J. Stucchi, and T. F. Sutherland, A Perspective on the Use of Performance Based Standards to Assist in Fish Habitat Management on the Seafloor near Salmon Net Pen Operations in British Columbia (West Vancouver, B.C.: Fisheries and Oceans Canada, 2002).
111. R. C. Anderson, Incentive-Based Policies for Environmental Management in Developing Countries, Resources for the Future brief 02-07, 2002, accessible via http://www.rff.org/Johannesburg/Issuebriefs/joburgl.pdf.; and M. Potoski and A. Prakash, "Protecting the Environment: Voluntary Regulations in Environmental Governance," Policy Currents 11, no. 4 (2002): 9-14.
112. R. C. Anderson, Incentive-Based Policies for Environmental Management in Developing Countries, Resources for the Future brief 02-07, 2002, accessible via http://www.rff.org/Johannesburg/Issuebriefs/joburgl.pdf.; and M. Potoski and A. Prakash, "Protecting the Environment: Voluntary Regulations in Environmental Governance," Policy Currents 11, no. 4 (2002): 9-14.
113. The aquaculture industry and the Alaskan salmon-fishing industry have both applied for organic labels through USDA certification. They have been rejected due to insufficient control over feed inputs (comprised in part of fishmeal and fish oil derived from wild forage fish) and (in the case of wild capture) insufficient control over the salmon throughout their life cycle. See W. Loy, "USDA Advisory Board Says No to Organic Label for Wild Fish," Fish Information & Services, 18 October 2001, accessible via http://www.fis.com. A new provision for organic labeling of Alaska fishery-caught salmon has been reintroduced in the 2003 U.S. fiscal appropriations bill (PL 108, 7). In the United Kingdom, provisions have also been made to label fish sold in supermarkets as wild versus farm origin. See R. Edwards, "Food Agency Caught Out Over Salmon Labelling Delay," The Sunday Herald, 15 June 2003. accessible via http://www.sundayherald. com/34586. Finally, the Global Alliance on Aquaculture (an industry-based group) formed the Aquaculture Certification Council in 2002 to address social and environmental criteria for farm operations. Certification is being directed initially toward shrimp farming but could apply to other species over time. See http://www.aquaculturecertification.org/accstan. html.
114. The aquaculture industry and the Alaskan salmon-fishing industry have both applied for organic labels through USDA certification. They have been rejected due to insufficient control over feed inputs (comprised in part of fishmeal and fish oil derived from wild forage fish) and (in the case of wild capture) insufficient control over the salmon throughout their life cycle. See W. Loy, "USDA Advisory Board Says No to Organic Label for Wild Fish," Fish Information & Services, 18 October 2001, accessible via http://www.fis.com. A new provision for organic labeling of Alaska fishery-caught salmon has been reintroduced in the 2003 U.S. fiscal appropriations bill (PL 108, 7). In the United Kingdom, provisions have also been made to label fish sold in supermarkets as wild versus farm origin. See R. Edwards, "Food Agency Caught Out Over Salmon Labelling Delay," The Sunday Herald, 15 June 2003. accessible via http://www.sundayherald. com/34586. Finally, the Global Alliance on Aquaculture (an industry-based group) formed the Aquaculture Certification Council in 2002 to address social and environmental criteria for farm operations. Certification is being directed initially toward shrimp farming but could apply to other species over time. See http://www.aquaculturecertification.org/accstan. html.
115. For more information, see the Marine Stewardship Council (MSC) web site at http://www.msc.org.
116. ADFG. Summary Report on the Certification of Commercial Salmon Fisheries in Alaska, September 2001. accessible via http://www.state.ak.us/adfg/geninfo/special/sustain/mscreprt.pdf; Environment and Natural Resources Institute (ENRI), Evaluating Alaska's Ocean-Ranching Salmon Hatcheries: Biologic and Management Issues, prepared for Trout Unlimited (Anchorage: ENRI, University of Alaska, 2001); D. E. Shindler et al., "Pacific Salmon and the Ecology of Coastal Ecosystems," Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment I, no. 1 (2003): 31-37: and Eagle, Naylor, and Smith, note 40 above.
117. ADFG. Summary Report on the Certification of Commercial Salmon Fisheries in Alaska, September 2001. accessible via http://www.state.ak.us/adfg/geninfo/special/sustain/mscreprt.pdf; Environment and Natural Resources Institute (ENRI), Evaluating Alaska's Ocean-Ranching Salmon Hatcheries: Biologic and Management Issues, prepared for Trout Unlimited (Anchorage: ENRI, University of Alaska, 2001); D. E. Shindler et al., "Pacific Salmon and the Ecology of Coastal Ecosystems," Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment I, no. 1 (2003): 31-37: and Eagle, Naylor, and Smith, note 40 above.
118. ADFG. Summary Report on the Certification of Commercial Salmon Fisheries in Alaska, September 2001. accessible via http://www.state.ak.us/adfg/geninfo/special/sustain/mscreprt.pdf; Environment and Natural Resources Institute (ENRI), Evaluating Alaska's Ocean-Ranching Salmon Hatcheries: Biologic and Management Issues, prepared for Trout Unlimited (Anchorage: ENRI, University of Alaska, 2001); D. E. Shindler et al., "Pacific Salmon and the Ecology of Coastal Ecosystems," Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment I, no. 1 (2003): 31-37: and Eagle, Naylor, and Smith, note 40 above.
119. ADFG. Summary Report on the Certification of Commercial Salmon Fisheries in Alaska, September 2001. accessible via http://www.state.ak.us/adfg/geninfo/special/sustain/mscreprt.pdf; Environment and Natural Resources Institute (ENRI), Evaluating Alaska's Ocean-Ranching Salmon Hatcheries: Biologic and Management Issues, prepared for Trout Unlimited (Anchorage: ENRI, University of Alaska, 2001); D. E. Shindler et al., "Pacific Salmon and the Ecology of Coastal Ecosystems," Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment I, no. 1 (2003): 31-37: and Eagle, Naylor, and Smith, note 40 above.
120. Trade representatives of the World Trade Organization (WTO) met again 10-14 September in Cancun. Mexico, to resume discussions of the Doha Round. The U.S.-Chile Trade Agreement was settled in December 2002 after 10 years of prior negotiation, but discussions over individual trade issues, including salmon trade, are ongoing. See http://www.wto.org and http://www. chileusafta.com.
121. For information on WTO's current activities, see http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dda_e/dda_e.htm. Regarding MSC, also see Z. Grader, P. Parravano, G. Spain and N. Benjamin, "Going Beyond Fish Eco-Labeling: Is It Time for Fair-Trade Certification?" Fishermen's News, March 2003, accessible via http://www.pcffa.org/fn-mar03.htm.
122. For information on WTO's current activities, see http://www.wto.org/english/tratop_e/dda_e/dda_e.htm. Regarding MSC, also see Z. Grader, P. Parravano, G. Spain and N. Benjamin, "Going Beyond Fish Eco-Labeling: Is It Time for Fair-Trade Certification?" Fishermen's News, March 2003, accessible via http://www.pcffa.org/fn-mar03.htm.
123. V. Menotti, P. Parravano, N. Benjamin, and Z. Grader, "Trade Decisions Could Transform Fisheries," Fishermen's News, April 2003, accessible via http://www.pcffa.org/fn-apr03.htm.
124. U.S. imports of Chilean farm salmon have increased tenfold in the past decade.
125. The official title of the agreement was the "Convention for the Conservation of Salmon in the North Atlantic Ocean to Minimize Impacts from Salmon Aquaculture on the Wild Salmon Stocks," The seven member countries of the North Atlantic Salmon Conservation Organization (NASCO) in 1994 were Norway, Canada. the United Kingdom, the United States, Ireland, Iceland, and the Faroe Islands (Denmark). Some representation in NASCO has since changed (the Russian Federation, for example, is now a member).
126. G. Porter, Protecting Wild Atlantic Salmon from Impacts of Salmon Aquaculture: A Country-by-Country Progress Report (Washington, D.C. and St. Andrews, N.B.: World Wildlife Fund and Atlantic Salmon Federation, 2003), accessible via http://www.asf.ca/Aquaculture/2003osloprogress/01-osloresprogress.pdf. The regions evaluated for the report include the NASCO member nations in 1994: see note 91 above. In ranking a set of 10 measurable criteria for the reduction of impacts by the industry on wild fish stocks (1 being the lowest and 10 being the highest measures to lessen the impact), the average score was just over 2. Norway had the highest score (3.4), and the United States and Canada had among the lowest scores (0.5 and 2.95 respectively).
127. Weber, note 66 above.