The aquaculture industry in Canada

Aquaculture industry in Canada is focused on the farming of Atlantic salmon on the coast of British Columbia. While the industry generates stable income flows for the province, these flows come at a cost. Aquaculture on the coast of BC brings with it increased incidence of sea lice that infect wild salmon populations, and the increased risk of salmon escaping from the farms. Because the farms focus on Atlantic salmon, a non-native species, there is risk that escaped fish could endanger indigenous wild salmon stocks. The controversy around aquaculture therefore tends to pit different stakeholders against each other. The industry touts its economic benefits and cites claims that aquaculture's dangers are overstated. Opponents -- a loose coalition of native bands, environmental activists and other local stakeholders. The governments -- the federal government having the greatest jurisdiction over the nation's fisheries -- must weigh the needs of the different stakeholders in determining how they govern aquaculture. The benefits of aquaculture tend to accrue to a few; the costs to many. As an environmental policy expert, my opinion is that while some aquaculture in Canada is relatively benign, such as shellfish farming -- the risks posed by the farming of Atlantic salmon on the Pacific coast outweigh the benefits. I do not support the salmon farming industry in British Columbia.

Benefits of Aquaculture

There are several benefits to aquaculture in Canada. According to Young and Matthews (p.5), the industry in British Columbia produced 72,000 tonnes of salmon, valued at $364 million. This is larger than the wild salmon industry has averaged from 1998-2006 (p26). Most salmon farms are owned by major fish companies, many of which are multinational firms. The farms are located typically in remote locations along the south and central coast of British Columbia. The farms create some jobs in these local communities. While these jobs are relatively high-paying and stable (p.16), there are few of them. With estimates for national aquaculture employment in the 5000-6000 range, only a minority percentage of those would be in salmon farming in BC. The stakeholders who benefit from aquaculture, therefore, are the multinational firms that own the farms, and the hundreds of people employed in the industry. These companies also contribute a limited amount of tax revenue to the provincial and federal governments.

Environmental Concerns and Risks

From the perspective of an environmental policy expert, the environment is the key point of concern about salmon farming in BC. There are several points of concern, all of which create apprehension among the industry's external stakeholders such as the environment (and environmentalist groups) and native bands. The authors identify four main components of the risks created by aquaculture. These are environmental, human health, rights and rural development. As an environmental policy expert, I accept that the latter three issues are not necessarily within my field of expertise. However, I have enough understanding of the basic issues to understand that the issue of rights in particular mounts a significant obstacle to the acceptance of aquaculture.

However, it is the environmental issues that concern me most. The most important environmental issue with respect to aquaculture is whether the safety of the environment is at risk as the result of aquaculture activities. There is a philosophical argument that aquaculture represents an "industrialization of nature" (p. 7). This is a quaint notion, one that ignores the reality that all human activity affects the external environment, however minor or seemingly benign. Environmental policy needs to be driven by science and fact, not by philosophy and certainly not be selective drawing of lines in the sand about what is acceptable human interaction with the environment.

One environmental impact is that smaller fish are harvested to provide food meal for the farmed salmon stocks, and some argue that this depletes those resources. Whether this depletion is at sustainable levels or not does not appear to have been determined. A bigger concern is with the waste generated by aquaculture. The industry occupies water in small bays, fjords or inlets, which are relatively closed systems compared with the open ocean. Fecal matter and uneaten food escapes the fish farms into the local environment (p.8), which depending on the specific underwater geography may or may not be able to properly process that matter or remove it. There do not appear to be any studies that indicate whether this is specifically detrimental to the environment, but the unknown does represent a risk that fish farm waste creates adverse effects.

Another environmental impact is with the impact on wild salmon. The aquaculture industry argues that farmed salmon eases pressure on wild stocks. Theoretically, this may be true but in practice the argument lacks strength. Wild salmon stocks are subject to quotas and active management from the Department of Fisheries, and the global overfishing problem is not necessarily related to wild salmon stocks. There is no evidence presented that demand for wild salmon decreases as the result of the increased availability of farmed salmon.

Most farmed salmon are Atlantic salmon, which are preferred by the industry for a couple of reasons. These salmon are not native to British Columbia. Specimens do escape from fish farms, and this creates significant risk to local species. On the Atlantic Coast, wild stocks of Atlantic salmon are listed as critically endangered, and can be put at risk by escaped farm fish. In British Columbia, the Atlantic salmon is an invasive species and can take over local waterways, reducing the environment for local salmon species (p.8). Further, local species can be put at risk through the transmission of disease from fish farms. The high density of fish in aquaculture locations facilitates the transfer of pathogen (p.8), including sea lice. Sea lice can affect juvenile wild salmon that are entering the ocean for the first time, and can cause them death. Speculation has even held that sea lice have reduced wild salmon returns, although there is no evidence for that. The environment surrounding fish farms is also put at risk due to the use of various chemicals and pollutants in the production of farmed salmon. These include PCBs, dioxins and other "persistent organic pollutants" (p.8).

The most significant of these environmental risks is to wild salmon stocks and to the local environment. The risk of Atlantic salmon escaping is high, due to adverse weather, broken nets or human error. The industry does not appear to have adequately addressed these risks. The risks associated with sea lice and fish waste have received insufficient response from the industry. Part of the problem may lie with current regulations, but part of the problem may also lie with enforcement, since most aquaculture in British Columbia is conducted in remote locations.

Conclusions

The current debate about aquaculture is highly-charged emotionally, but lacks significant basic information. Much of the science surrounding aquaculture has been contested by different stakeholders, so remains largely inconclusive. When dealing in environmental policy, the key is to understand the risks. The absence of information, or reliable information, may make it more difficult to determine specific risk levels, but the absence of information also does not reduce risk. If anything, inadequate information increases risk, because risk is that which is uncertain.