|
|||||||||||||
|
|
  Protecting the Run of the River For years Danny Gerak, the owner of the Pitt River Lodge, had been worried about the way the river was running. The Pitt, a wild salmon, steelhead and trout stream that cuts through the Coast Range just outside Vancouver, is one of those rivers that whipsaws back and forth across the valley floor. Sometimes it nudges itself into a new channel only a bit off course from the old one; other times, pushed by flood waters and diverted by log jams, it will turn aside and plough through a thicket or trees, or blow over a gravel bar. What had Danny worried was an old dump, buried in the bush near an abandoned logging camp. He’d walked through there, seen the batteries and the old oil cans sticking out of the surface, and knew that if the Pitt ever decided to charge in this direction, it would be an environmental disaster. So he started calling government officials. He called federal politicians, provincial politicians and bureaucrats at every level. When governments have departments with labels such as Fisheries and Oceans, or Environment, you’d expect they would be ready to just jump on something like this. Think again. Danny’s phone calls went ignored for years. Then the river changed course, cutting into the gravel bank on the edge of the dump and exposing layers and layers of garbage. Soon the garbage was spilling into the river. Plastic bags, Styrofoam cups, bottles, cans.The garbage washed downstream and got hung up in low branches or was dumped out on the shoreline. As the Pitt River Lodge guides worked the river they started picking up garbage. This wasn’t a particularly nice part of their day. And their guests were understandably horrified. Danny kept making phone calls. And he kept getting ignored. Eventually the story made its way into the media and pictures of the garbage dump that was tumbling into the river made it into the press. Barry Penner, British Columbia’s Minister of Environment, had taken notice of the problem sometime earlier and had ordered some studies done. When he became fully aware of the nature of the problem, he took the issue to cabinet, got a budget approved, and ordered a clean up. Several months and more than one million dollars later, Danny walked through the woods where the garbage dump had been and marveled at what had been accomplished. Not only had the remediation crew taken out all the garbage, barging it across Pitt Lake and sending it to a real dump, but also they had rebuilt the riverbank, and had smoothed out the forest floor so that you couldn’t tell what had been there. Danny says he can’t believe how clean the river is now. “It’s unbelievable,” he says. What’s really unbelievable is that a logging company could get away with making such a mess – and that bureaucrats would sit and twiddle their thumbs for years, hemming and hawing until a crisis developed. Mr. Penner acted promptly once he was aware of the the problem and his government is to be commended for finally cleaning up this important river. In really good government, of course, the bureaucrats are out in front of the politicians, enforcing the environmental laws so that dumps like the banks of the Pitt River never get created in the first place. That’s called enforcement and there isn’t enough of it going on in B.C. The Pitt is running clean once again. But you can bet your ass that somewhere in the great province of British Columbia someone is trashing the environment. At the federal and provincial levels, governments should be putting more effort into enforcement. In the long run it will be cheaper for taxpayers, and better for the environment. -Mark Hume Letters can be sent via e-mail to: letters@ariverneversleeps.com
Words from an Old Salt The Editors: A very generous gift from a friend, of a baker's dozen of Mo Bradley's flies that he chose based on where I live and what she told him about me, prompted me to look up his writings again. I have read some of Mo's goodies before but then I found this site.....what a wonderful tribute to great fly fisherpeople everywhere!!...I really enjoy Mo's goodies, the photos by Nick Didlick, the stories from "Old Bag" and the awesome research that you folks do on everything. As a novice fisherman (am 55 and just started after 40 years of little or no sport fishing...don't ask!) this is an absolute marvel to learn from and enjoy. I am looking forward to retirement soon and certainly will maintain this site in my records for reference and information. Thanks so much for allowing an "old salt" to catch up and re-learn such a marvelous sport!! Bud Alcock Thanks for the Visit The Editors: I have had the pleasure of spending a week in British Columbia each year for the past 20 years. Through this web site, I feel that I can visit BC every day! Thanks for making it possible. Regards, Dave Farrar Fly Fishing for Coho Where Can I Find a Good Guide? Dear Sir; Over the last 65+ years my father has fly fished for rainbow in the Bow, Spray lakes(before they were dammed), Interior BC (north and south), for Tarpon, for steelhead on the Dean, and the Rogue. But to date he has never fly-fished for Coho. I want to treat him to a Salt chuck Coho trip armed only with fly rods. We are interested in using a guide, but don't know where to start to find a good fly fishing guide for the open salt chuck. Can you help me locate a fly fishing guide that knows the Coho fishery? -Jon Eaton John: I recently fished for Coho in the open waters off the Queen Charlotte Islands and I would suggest you start by looking at www.westcoastfishingclub.com <http://www.westcoastfishingclub.com> and especially the North Island Lodge and also look at http://www.queencharlottelodge.com/ . Make sure when you inquire to tell them you are interested in fly fishing and look into the mid-July through mid -August period for the best times. There are other places to fly fish for Coho but you might as well start at the top .... The Club House and QCL have two completely different fishing areas and as always fly-fishing for Coho in open water requires the weather to co-operate. If you require additional info after checking into the above sites drop us a line again (pardon the pun) rgds Share the Waters The Editor: The nub of these new fishing regulations in southeastern BC is not about the fish (but they will surely benefit) nor is it about non-resident fishing license fees (although the additional revenue provided by residents, non-residents and guides will finance the enhanced management).The nub of the matter is sustaining the high quality fishing experiences which attract all of us to these waters. We all have a different definition of quality, but the emerging combat style of fishing I now encounter regularly on these waters does not fall into my definition and I expect, does not match many others as well. So....short term pain, hopefully for long term gain. Let's calm down, share the waters, and all be part of the forward thinking and proactive solutions. Barry Rogers New Elk Regs Tough On Families To Whom it May Concern: A tough call for families. I introduced my son to the joys of fishing and conservation on the streams of the Elk Valley. His 3 sisters are now asking for the same experience. We have camped for weeks on end at Mount Fernie and have enjoyed the many pleasures the area has to offer. My son is just getting to the age where he wants to set off on his own on Lizard Creek and his sisters will not be far behind. The classification system, ok the $20 is making this difficult if not impossible. I grew up fishing Atlantic salmon and overcrowded rivers soured me on the experience. So long and short, the crowding be it drift boats or walkers is a problem but so is a per day cost that takes families out of the joys of fishing and the values to be learned and passed on while enjoying the best nature has to offer. Please come up with a solution that works for families. Richard Campbell A New Fly Site Dear Fellow Fly Fishers and Friends: We are pleased to announce the launch of www.PennsylvaniaOnTheFly.com a site for fly fishing enthusiasts in Pennsylvania and around the world. At your convenience please take a look at our Website. We also love to get feedback so let us know how we may improve upon what you see. Tight Lines, Short Praise Good Work, keep it up. Cika Stop the Jet Boats! The Editors: Again, I made a spring trip to the Pitt River (in British Columbia) and cannot reflect the beauty of the river and its surroundings (without jetboats this time) to any reader! I guess as an American we just don’t have anything like it with the dams that stop our fish from the Pacific! When I say dams I don't mean two, I mean like 4-6-8 of them! Canada is a fortunate country not to have dams. We have ruined our trout streams with reservoirs and ruined our salmon runs with dams! I guess it is a tragedy that the Canadians should and can learn from! I live in a State with the longest free flowing river, prior to a dam, than any! Idaho. We have more rednecks slinging treble hooks and lead than probably all the jet boaters combined on one day, in one place in B.C. combined! Jet boats are like wheel chairs for rednecks to catch salmon here! Gas Guzzling lead slingin *@#&holes! Beauty will prevail! Stop the jetboats, its peaceful without ‘em on the Pitt! Tony Fallow What Happened to the Cheakamus? I was just wondering if you have completed any editorials on the recent Cheakamus River spill event? Since the time of the event, I have heard very little about the state of the river, other than some thoughts from provincial and federal agencies. Unfortunately, I don't completely trust what they have to say. I recall a conservation officer being interviewed at the command post stating that only a couple hundred fish were found dead. Though, when I helped with the fish collection, I may have come across 100 dead fish in a 25m long reach on the edge of the river. If you have written an article, can you please point me in the direction to where I could find it? If you have not written something, I ask that you do. . . .(to) capture people’s attention and potentially lead the way in the continued effort to have CN held accountable for the incident. I understand that these environmental disasters will happen in today's day and age (as has happened in the past), but without the public forcing our elected representatives to do something about it, nothing will change. I read an article about a similar situation in California's Sacramento River and an area of the railway called the Caltera Loop. Following the event, the local representatives attempted to have new regulations enforced. They got quite far with their efforts, only to be turned back by the Supreme Court. Maybe we would be lucky enough to have changes, or at least a review into our Railway Act to reflect some of the environmental disasters that are happening over the last little while. I appreciate your time with this question. Cory (Ed. note: Since you wrote, we have had an opportunity to investigate and write about the Cheakamus spill. There is an article in this edition.) Fish Farm Dust Up (The letter below, and the response to it that follows, first appeared in The Langley Times.) Editor: There has been an escalation recently in the rhetoric surrounding the health and future of wild salmon (seemingly all stocks and species) within the province of B.C. This comes from a television drama that portrayed the end of salmon (Boston Legal - Oct. 11) and a media commentator who lamented a "virtual wipeout" of pink salmon because of sea lice in fish farms and because "the wild salmon has no friends in Victoria or Ottawa." (Rafe Mair - The Times, Oct. 12). Let us be clear, wild salmon very definitely do have friends in Ottawa and in every other region of Canada, thanks to the efforts of committed and highly skilled Fisheries and Oceans Canada employees who are responsible for developing programs that protect Canada's fisheries resources now, and for generations to come. In relation to sea lice, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) has been conducting detailed monitoring of their possible effect on wild salmon in the Broughton Archipelago since 2003, and has records on pink salmon returns dating back to the 1950s. These show pink salmon populations naturally experience large between-year swings — dropping below the number of returns in 2000 nine times in the past 50 years. Far from on the verge of being wiped out, this year's returns of pink salmon will exceed their spawning numbers in their brood (spawning) year (2003), in most Broughton Archipelago rivers. To date, there is no evidence that sea lice from salmon farms have caused wild salmon stocks to decline. Regardless of that, we are continuing to investigate the sources of sea lice on all salmon species whether farmed or wild. We are looking at all influences on wild salmon numbers — including environmental factors that contribute to sea lice abundance like water temperatures and salinity — and we will continue to do so. In relation to salmon farming, our job, every day of every week throughout the year, is to manage fisheries and aquiculture in a sustainable and environmentally responsible manner for the benefit of all Canadians. We also work closely with the province to ensure salmon farms are managed in a manner that minimizes impacts on the environment and other marine life. That's what Canadians expect from us — decision-making that is ecologically-sensitive, scientifically-based, and above all 'fish friendly.' -Paul Sprout, Regional Director General, Pacific Region, Dear Editor: Mr. Sprout has written a political document and has neglected to say several things. 1. The science has been there for some years. Alexandra Morton has had extensive research done in the Broughton Archipelago which has been peer reviewed by the finest scientists in the world, including Dr Patrick Gargan of Ireland, Dr Dan Pawley, of UBC, Dr. John Volpe of the University of Calgary and the University of British Columbia and Neil Frazer of the University of Hawaii, and published in leading science publications. 2. Martin Kroksek did a study as recently as last Spring, peer reviewed and published in the prestigious science journal Proceedings of the Royal Society B. which leaves no doubt about lice from Brougton Fish farms hitting migrating Pink and Chum salmon smolts 3. The evidence of the connection between fish farm lice and migrating wild salmonids in Norway, Scotland and Ireland is overwhelming. 4. Good science demands the use of the "precautionary" method which simply stated says if you are going to do anything potentially dangerous in the environment, it should not be done until it is clearly demonstrated to be harmless. The DFO and BC Agricultural ministry, far from following this principle, allowed the farms to go ahead and placed the onus upon others to prove the harm. 5. I note that Mr. Sprout doesn't talk about the mess the cages cause, the diseases they are subject to, their penchant for escaping from cages and pushing wild salmon off the spawning grounds and he pays no mind to study after study that says farmed fish are unhealthy to eat. 6. Finally, Mr. Sprout neglects to say that both his department and the BC Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Fish have a mandate to promote fish farms! The inmates are in charge of the asylum! The independent, published science is clear - the adverse relationship between lice from fish cages and migrating salmon is beyond argument save as to how serious the damage is. Oh, yes, when a few years ago, Alexandra Morton began her work the DFO threatened to put her in jail for illegal sampling! That's how helpful the governments have been! Sincerely, An Open Letter On Fish Farm Issues Office of the Auditor General of Canada and the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development Attention: Petitions Re: Petition seeking answers to questions arising from DFO’s public statements on sea lice and aquaculture It’s frequently challenging to be a civil servant, and Fisheries and Oceans’ (DFO) staff deserve a substantial amount of credit for showing up to answer often-tough questions from concerned stakeholders and interested members of the public. The issues they deal with can also be complex, emotionally charged, and thus difficult to explain—topics such as sea lice and DFO’s aquaculture policy, which are discussed frequently in the media and at public meetings in British Columbia. Unfortunately, the literature on resource management (e.g. Holling and Gunderson 2002; Understanding transformations in human and natural systems, Island Press) is also replete with examples of a “resource management pathology” in which civil servants deliberately exploit complexity and uncertainty by unfairly shifting the burden of proving environmental damage onto the public—thus hindering much-needed action. At a recent meeting (July 20, 2005, Lynn Valley Senior’s Association, North Vancouver) in which I spoke along with DFO’s Senior Aquaculture Officer Andrew Thomson (Pacific Region), I mentioned that several European louse researchers have publicly chided Canadians to stop the silly and obfuscatory debate about whether farm-source lice are impacting wild fish, accept the considerable weight of evidence that lice do have impacts, and get on with honest attempts to mitigate those impacts. Many recent academic papers and workshops (e.g., SFU’s November 18, 2004 Scientists Roundtable on Sea Lice; http://www.sfu.ca/cstudies/science/publications.htm#fisheries and attached) have also reached the conclusion that lice epizootics on juvenile fish originate from farms, and that these epizootics can have population level impacts on fish (e.g., 30-50% mortality from lice parasitism of all sea trout, and 48-86% of all salmon smolts in Norway; Butler 2002: attached). All this prompts concerns about how DFO continues to portray the sea louse situation in public presentations and media articles (and in recent fact sheets now posted on its web), as well as why DFO has affixed an “anti-aquaculture” label in its “communications strategy” to those who question the impacts of current and inadequate aquaculture practices. To ensure that I am hearing what I think I’ve been hearing—and to avoid unfairly maligning DFO, industry, or others—I sent a letter to DFO’s Andrew Thomson on July 25, 2005, asking him to answer a few relevant questions. Ms. Diane Lake of DFO Communications replied to me via e-mail (attached) on July 25 providing clarification on her department’s “sea lice communications strategy” but, to date, I have not had the courtesy of a reply from Mr. Thomson on the important questions contained in my letter, and I am thus prompted to seek those answers through your assistance via this Petition to the CESD under the Auditor General Act. The questions I have asked Mr. Thomson and still await answers on are: 1. Did I in any way on the 20th come off as anti-aquaculture? If so, how, specifically? What is your definition of anti-aquaculture? And why does DFO’s draft “Pacific Region Sea Lice Communications Strategy” (pages 2 and 3) name Watershed Watch (and other groups and individuals) as being part of the “anti-aquaculture movement?” Is this assessment based on a professional analysis of Watershed Watch’s many contributions to academic workshops and educational programs on aquaculture and wild salmon? Does it acknowledge Watershed Watch’s oft-stated assertion that it is not opposed to aquaculture, but only to unsustainable forms of aquaculture? You’ll surely understand that I am interested in your assessment to ensure I don’t mistake such language as a convenient and derogatory label meant to serve some other purpose. 2. I believe you claimed on the 20th that the lice found on juvenile salmon come from many sources, including wild salmon, sticklebacks, and farmed fish. I believe I have heard other DFO personnel repeat this assertion in various meetings and media interviews. While this may be true in the broadest sense, I have not yet heard DFO venture an opinion on what percentage of lice might come from each source. I believe, though, that I did hear DFO’s Dr. Dick Beamish at a May 11, 2005 Sport Fishing Institute meeting say that he had not found enough wild salmon in the Broughton to justify previous claims that wild fish are the primary source for the infections, and he thus now suspects that lice from sticklebacks play an important role in such epizootics. Can you please clarify what you believe to be true relative to the source of these lice by answering the following: How many wintering salmon did Dr. Beamish find in the Broughton? What, for instance, has he reported in his BCARD (British Columbia Aquaculture Research and Development program) progress reports? How do these numbers compare with farmed fish numbers (e.g., those available on Stolt’s (Marine Harvest) web)? Did I accurately hear him say that he does not now believe wild salmon to be a significant source of these lice? Does DFO believe sticklebacks to be the primary host source of lice in the Broughton? Or, are sticklebacks possibly a secondary or intermediate host? What species of lice have been found? How do lice numbers on Broughton sticklebacks compare to those on sticklebacks in areas without farms? If such data are available, isn’t it ethical and scientifically correct to provide control comparisons? If such data are unavailable, isn’t it ethical and scientifically correct to say so? Is there evidence that lice, especially L. salmonis, are capable of reproducing on sticklebacks? What progress has DFO made on determining the relative proportion of lice originating from these 3 sources? Doesn’t an answer to this question require that DFO attempt to estimate the production of lice from farmed fish as per the “infection pressure” methods of Heuch and Mo (2001) and Butler (2002)? Have such estimates been made? Shared with the public? If not (to either), why not? 3. You said on the 20th that you believed risks from farm source lice to be “manageable.” What do you mean by manageable? Is there a specific level of risk or impact you attach to this definition? If so, what level? Have you projected how these risks might change with varied levels of farm production (or louse thresholds)? If not, why not, especially considering the Heuch et al. (2005) assessment of Norway’s less-than-hoped-for management actions (A review of the Norwegian Action Plan against salmon lice on salmonids: the effects on wild salmonids. Aquaculture 246:79-92)? Have you read this paper? Do you agree with it and find it applicable to the BC situation? If not, why not? Finally, do you believe that salmon farming as currently practiced is compatible with the prime conservation of biodiversity goal of DFO’s newly-minted wild salmon policy? 4. You claimed on the 20th that DFO was making progress on area management strategies (e.g., as portrayed in recent papers dealing with Scotland’s agreements, such as McKibben and Hay 2004; attached). Can you please elaborate on that progress? Do you believe area management to be an effective management tool? And why/why not? 5. Can you please share more information on the waste-modeling study you mentioned? I also told Mr. Thomson that, while I have other questions and concerns, these are the principal ones that will help me interpret what I have been hearing. I also offered to assist him by providing any of the material I have cited (most of which is attached). Considering the urgency of this issue, and the benefits to Canadians of honest dialogue around resource development and management, I would appreciate assistance from your office in obtaining answers to my questions. Sincerely, Craig Orr, Ph.D. {E-mail letters may be edited for clarity, taste and brevity. It is understood they express the opinions of the writers, not the editors.} |
||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||
|
     |
