Ottawa pledges $284 million to expand protections for fish habitats

Posted on February 21, 2018August 6, 2022 by david

Ottawa pledges $284 million to expand protections for fish habitats

By Mia Rabson The Canadian Press

WATCH ABOVE: The federal government has pledged to “restore lost protections” for fish habitats that were lost under the Harper government with a $284-million commitment

The federal government will spend $284 million over the next five years to enforce new laws protecting habitat wherever fish are present, Fisheries Minister Dominic LeBlanc says.

A number of amendments to the Fisheries Act were introduced in the House of Commons Tuesday morning to expand the reach of a prohibition against anything that alters or impacts fish habitat to all waters where fish exist.

Changes to the act in 2012 meant the protections were enforced only for fish listed in provincial registries as being part of commercial, recreational or Indigenous fisheries.

Officials with Fisheries and Oceans Canada said in Ottawa today the 2012 changes resulted in a lot of confusion about exactly what projects would require a federal government assessment, because it wasn’t always clear which fish needed protecting and which didn’t.

The government intends to produce regulations that will spell out exactly which projects will require a federal assessment and ministerial permit to proceed and which will not. The department is consulting on those regulations now.

Global fisheries declining at alarming rate

Climate change could mean lead to major revenue hit for East Coast fisheries: study

Canada’s Fisheries department and Oceana Canada team up to explore the Gulf of St. Lawrence

Department of fisheries cracks down on illegal fishing

Environmental impact of toxic sludge on BC fisheries

Foreign Workers and fisheries

As well, any reviews done will be captured in a public registry so the public can see the results of every review, something that is not required now.

The act also will require the minister to take into account Indigenous knowledge and expertise when it is provided and all decisions must take into account the possible impacts on Indigenous rights. However that knowledge will be protected from being revealed publicly or even to a project’s proponents without explicit permission from the Indigenous community or people who provided it.

The $284 million will be allocated to help implement and enforce the new law, including hiring new fisheries officers to enforce the act and educate people about it, however officials say there are no details yet about how many will be hired and when.

The legislation also will make it illegal to capture whales, dolphins and porpoises in Canadian waters for the purpose of keeping them in captivity. Officials say existing permits for such activities will be honoured, but in the future only animals captured because they are in distress, injured or in need of care can be held in captivity in Canada.

The amendments to the Fisheries Act are part of a package of government changes to the federal environmental assessment process and fulfills a mandate item issued to LeBlanc when he became the minister.

The bill will be followed later this week by another one that will overhaul the National Energy Board, as well as revise the Navigable Waters Protection Act.

Martin Olszynski, a University of Calgary law professor who worked as a lawyer for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans between 2007 and 2013, said the 2012 changes made to the Fisheries Act differentiated between fish that matter and fish that don

“More substantively, it signalled to a lot of people in Canada that suddenly this prohibition didn’t matter,” Olszynski said. “So you had what was already a very under-regulated issue which impacts fish and fish habitat mostly as a result of resource development becoming that much less supervised.”

He said after the act was introduced the number of projects referred to Fisheries and Oceans Canada for assessment was cut in half. Officials expect the number of referrals and project reviews will go back up, but they said it’s too early to say how many more assessments will be done.

There have been between 80 and 400 reviews in recent years. Lots more habitat news at fishiding.com

The government has been studying these changes since 2016, with online consultations, meetings with Indigenous communities and governments and a study by the House of Commons fisheries committee.

What Exactly Is Fish Habitat and Why Must We Care?

Posted on June 12, 2013August 6, 2022 by david

Forward Post: AFS Journal

What Exactly Is Fish Habitat and Why Must We Care?

Mon Jun 3, 2013 2:29pm

What Exactly Is Fish Habitat and Why Must We Care?Thomas E. Bigford
Office of Habitat Conservation, NOAA/National Marine Fisheries Service, Silver Spring, MD 20910.
E-mail: Thomas.bigford@noaa.gov

“Fish habitat” is a
simple term. We can easily
imagine a fish languishing
under a log or in
a kelp forest, and we can
picture a school of forage
fish zipping through the
water column. We can
also grasp that the preferred
space for many species might change as the seasons change and
the years pass by. But the rest of the story is not quite so simple,
mostly because life is more complicated and knowledge is often
limited. This month’s “Fish Habitat Connections” seeks to demystify
those details so we can appreciate the intricacies in the
fish habitat world and become more emboldened to serve fish
not just as a meal but as they deserve.
Let’s begin with semantics. Each fish occupies its preferred
niche in the ecosystem. The environmental conditions of that
space define the fish’s preference at each life stage—water
temperature, depth, salinity, flow, bottom type, prey availability annual cycles, and much more. It is important for us
as professionals to place those variables in proper context so
that individual fish can survive, fish stocks can flourish, fishery
management can succeed, and society can benefit from our nation’s
waters.
That simplistic summary reflects our hopes, which are
complicated by the reality that we know very little about our
most basic habitat questions. With luck, we know where fish
live throughout their life cycles. But oft times we have few
insights into the shifting preferences of each life stage. Even
that knowledge is elusive unless we have close observations
from multidecadal stock assessments or the insights offered
by a healthy fishery. Almost universally, we rarely understand
the relationships between fish and their habitat.

If a wetland is
dredged, how will the local fish populations change over the
short and long term? If a dam is breached, will the new hydrological
regime support native species or invite invasive species?
If an acre is protected or restored, how will the population respond?
Will harvests increase?
These issues read like the final program at many an American
Fisheries Society (AFS) conference. They have vexed us
as a profession for decades. We must manage fisheries with the
best available information, scant as it might be. And we must
identify our primary needs so that gaps are addressed.
COLUMN
Fish Habitat Connections There is also the still-new concept of ecosystem-based approaches.
Habitat must be an essential variable in stock assessments,
but those analyses must be conducted with an ecosystem
in mind. Those perspectives can be as important as data. Without
that challenge, we won’t even know we have a data gap.
Considering how complex this simple topic can be, and
how it reflects human pressures from our coasts to the mountains,
it is probably no surprise that we continue to lose habitat
function at alarming rates. Along our oceans, marine and estuarine
wetland loss was three times higher between 2004 and
2009 than in the previous 5 years (Stedman and Dahl 2008;
Dahl 2011). Inland wetland loss is not as severe, but hundreds of
rivers representing thousands of river miles are compromised by
blockages that prevent fish movement upstream or downstream.
The first-ever national fish habitat assessment found that 53%
of our estuaries are at high or very high risk of habitat degradation
(National Fish Habitat Board 2010). Given those numbers,
it is unfortunate that those places provide vital nursery habitats
for many of our favorite fish.
As fishery professionals from all disciplines, our assignment
is to combine our skills to protect important habitats and
restore those that are degraded. Our mission will be slightly
less daunting if we and our partners can set a pace to match
the steady pressure of human population growth and looming
challenges such as climate change. AFS represents an incredible
knowledge base. If anyone can analyze our habitat knowledge,
fill our priority gaps, apply lessons learned, and improve habitats
for the benefit of all, it is us.

More habitat articles at fishiding.com
Next month we will shift from the nuances of semantics
to the harsh realities of the challenge before us. It is imperative
that we engage now! Economic and ecological facts urge AFS,
its units, each of us, and our home institutions to accept the challenge.
We will explain the opportunities before us and how our
collective skills are needed for success.
REFERENCES
Dahl, T.E. 2011. Status and trends of wetlands in the conterminous
United States 2004-2009. U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish
and Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 108 pp.
National Fish Habitat Board. 2010. Through a fish’s eye: the status of
fish habitats in the United States 2010. Association of Fish and
Wildlife Agencies, Washington, D.C. 68 pp.
Stedman, S., and T. E. Dahl. 2008. Status and trends of wetlands in the
coastal watersheds of the Eastern United States 1998 to 2004. National
Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Marine
Fisheries Service, and U.S. Department of the Interior, Fish and
Wildlife Service, Washington, D.C. 32 pp.

New management plan for Southwest Pond

Posted on March 3, 2013August 6, 2022 by david

If you want to drop a line into Southwest Pond near Greenspond this summer, you should know the rules have changed — dramatically. Dozens of unique habitat models at fishiding.com

Topics :: Fisheries and Oceans Canada , Indian Bay Ecosystem , Southwest Pond , New-Wes-Valley ,Greenspond

As of June 1 of this year, anglers will only be permitted to retain two fish, regardless of species, from the pond, and they’ll have to obtain tags from Fisheries and Oceans Canada in order to do so.

For the fishers who are interested in catch-and-release, the limit will be four per season.

For the most part, federal officials said the purpose of the new regulations is to protect the salmon population in the pond. That’s what they told a group of about two dozen people who attended a public meeting in Valleyfield last week.

The news didn’t go over terribly well with some of the people in attendance. Harry Winter is the town manager for the municipality of New-Wes-Valley. He said council put a pond management program in place in 2000, and he’s not pleased to see the federal government come in and suggest it’s not working and needs to be replaced.

“It’s not good enough … to say that the management plan that we’ve got is not working?” Mr. Winter said. “Here’s a case of something not working because the federal department is not doing what’s required to implement and take care of that management plan, and I suggest if (they) do you’ll have no concerns and no complaints about the stocks in Southwest Pond.”

Mr. Winter said prior to the establishment of the management plan more than a dozen years ago, anglers could take up to 24 fish a day from the pond under provincial regulations.

When council, along with the Indian Bay Ecosystem Corporation and the federal fisheries department, decided to put a plan in place, the new rules meant anglers had to apply by bag limits that restricted them to the retention of six fish per day, or two pounds plus one fish, whichever came first.

The new rules will limit fishers to just two fish per season, regardless of species. They will also be required to obtain tags from the federal department.

Mr. Winter said while the new rules, in and of themselves, are troubling to many residents who have fished regularly on that pond for generations, what bothers him, and some other people even more is what they perceive as a failure on the part of the federal government to adequately relay to them information about the changes in a timely fashion.

“What gets to me is this was all done without them telling us anything,” said Mr. Winter. “Yes, they are now telling us what the new rules are, but we didn’t even know they were coming. There was no consultation with council, or with residents, before the rules were set in stone.”

Back in the late 1990s, some folks in New-Wes-Valley knew there was something that had to be done about the declining numbers of fish in Southwest Pond.

Protecting resources

The body of water, located off the highway that takes travellers from the main drag that is Route 320 in the direction of Greenspond, has been used for fishing by area anglers, and tourists, for generations.

But around 15 years ago, voices raised in concern for the protection of the fish stocks, and in particular the salmon known to call the pond home, began suggesting some rules needed to be put in place.

Enter the municipal council of New-Wes-Valley. It drafted and then put in place a management plan for the pond that it hoped would protect the salmon population.

“Back then, we knew something had to be done,” said Mr. Winter. “We sat down and put together a plan we believed would ensure there would always be salmon in that pond. Now, the federal government is telling us our plan is not good enough.”

“Yes, there were regulations, but they were never followed.”– Ken Hoyles, Deputy Mayor, New-Wes-Valley

Also on hand for the meeting was New-Wes-Valley Deputy Mayor Ken Hoyles. He said the concerns being raised by most people in the area do not stem from the simple idea of stock management and restrictions on the number of fish that can be retained. It’s more about ensuring everyone has enough information about the new regulations, and that the rules are properly enforced.

“Let’s do this in the proper manner,” Mr. Hoyles said. “We need to have some discussions to ensure this is the proper way to go with this, and get the basic background information, and maybe instead of two tags and game over, we might be able to put a process in place where you would have a bag limit, because I think what we’ve done here is we’ve gone from nothing to drastic. We’ve gone from no regulations to you only use two tags to catch two fish.”

Even after the management plan was put in place in 2000 by the council of that day, it was never enforced, officials said.

“You could go up there one day, catch three fish, go up the next day, catch one fish, the next day you might catch two fish,” said Mr. Hoyles. “Yes, there were regulations, but they were never followed. They were never enforced.

“They need to be enforced.”

tsaunders@ganderbeacon.ca

Twitter: @Beacon1Reporter

GreenView: Sierra Club applauds the new Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement

Posted on September 12, 2012August 7, 2022 by david

Updated GLWQA signed in Washington DC, September 7, 2012

By Mary Muter, Chair Sierra Club Canada Great Lakes Section

After 25 years the governments of Canada and the United States have finally come together on the terms of a new revised Great Lakes Water Quality Agreement (online here) that better reflects the current conditions of the Great Lakes than the 1987 Agreement. This new Agreement has three new Annexes – Aquatic Invasive Species, Habitat and Species and Climate Change Impacts – that will be able to take advantage of the increased knowledge on these important issues. The question is: will there be funding and resources to address the new challenges facing the Great Lakes when existing Areas Of Concern like Toronto and Detroit continue to show little sign of improvement? Dozens of unique habitat models at fishiding.com

Sierra Club applauds the governments’ commitment to prevent further loss of habitat and species that contribute to the protection of Great Lakes water quality. Those high quality coastal wetlands still intact on the Great Lakes would have to be at the top of the list needing protection. We have already lost 70% of coastal wetlands on Lakes Ontario and Erie due to pollution and/or development. Great Lakes wetlands are needed by about 80% of Great Lakes fish for spawning and or nursery habitat. If Great Lakes fish cannot find suitable spawning habitat they simply do not spawn. The Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources has already identified declining Northern Pike and Musky populations due to 13 years of sustained low water levels and loss of wetland habitat on Lakes Huron and Georgian Bay. We will be watching to see if the development and implementation of lakewide habitat and species protection, restoration, and conservation strategies will be met in their two year stated objective. Another critical issue will be whether individual targets or goals can be established for each Great Lake that reflect background conditions.

Will there be enough resources to meet these lofty objectives? It is hard to believe these objectives can be met while the Government of Canada has eliminated hundreds of science positions including closing the Experimental Lakes Project – the research station where Dr. David Schindler’s internationally respected ground-breaking research to identify phosphorus as the leading cause of algal growth. Where would we be today without that critical knowledge?

We need strengthened legislation not the weakened sections of the Fisheries Act by the removal of fish habitat. This one action alone has left thousands of un-assessed coastal wetlands now vulnerable to encroachment or degradation due to development.

Sierra Club hopes the new Agreement will better protect and restore the Great Lakes. To accomplish that our governments in Canada and the United States will need to involve the public at a very high level to ensure accountability and progress. We have a very valuable bi-national resource in the Great Lakes; to protect and restore them we require the best possible public and government actions along with the required resources. Only then will the obligations under this Agreement be fulfilled.

$4 million habitat project for fish at Colony Farm

Posted on July 11, 2012August 7, 2022 by david

Officials will mark the near completion of fish habitat at Wilson Farm at Colony Farm Regional Park with a celebration with the Kwikwetlem First Nation today.

TRI-CITY NEWS FILE PHOTO

SHARE THIS STORY

By Staff Writer – The Tri-City News

Juvenile salmon will have more protected habitat to get a good start in life thanks to a $4 million habitat enhancement project now nearing completion at Colony Farm Regional Park.

Environment Minister Terry Lake will be celebrating the near-completion of the project today, Monday, with members of the Kwikwetlem First Nation who were key to its development

Lake will join Metro Vancouver Environment and Parks Committee Chair Heather Deal and Kwikwetlem First Nation Chief Ron Giesbrecht in a ceremony to welcome the salmon, unveil a new interpretive sign on the Colony Farm walking path and showcase the habitat enhancement work.

The project, located on the “Wilson Farm” portion of Colony Farm Regional Park, has build a vital habitat for juvenile salmon and restored tidal function to a part of a river traditionally ranked high in the Outdoor Recreation Council’s ‘Endangered Rivers List’.

“This project went a long ways to addressing a major limiting factor to the production of salmon in the Coquitlam River,” said Dr. Craig Orr, environmental consultant to the Kwikwetlem First Nation in a press release. “Urbanization has claimed much of the juvenile salmon habitat in the lower Fraser River area, and this project aimed to restore a large part of that critical habitat.”

The Wilson Farm project, a negotiated highway construction mitigation project funded by the provincial Gateway Transportation Project, has deepened and expanded existing channels for juvenile fish, replaced old tidal pumps with newer and fish friendly pumps, and added cool groundwater to allow fish to survive better. The project was planned with help from experts from the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the private sector, and input from the public. It was also designed to have minimal impacts on the old field habitat of Colony Farm Park and its associated wildlife.

See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the leader in proven science based, fish protection.

The project received complaints from Burke Mountain Naturalists but went ahead with public consultation.

dstrandberg@trictynews.com

Audit finds fish habitat not well protected

Posted on July 10, 2012August 7, 2022 by david

Audit finds fish habitat not well protected, fire suppression system inadequate

Published on July 5, 2012 by DesiWireFeed · No Comments

THE CANADIAN PRESS

VICTORIA — An audit by British Columbia’s forestry watchdog has found 23 of 24 timber sales licence holders it investigated failed to comply with provincial legislation.

Auditors from the Forest Practices Board discovered instances where fish habitat was not being adequately protected because of sediment introduced into streams.

See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the leader in proven science based, fish protection.

The board says some BC Timber Sales licence holders failed to maintain the natural drainage patterns of several small streams while others did not have an adequate fire suppression system on site during extreme fire hazard conditions.

The areas audited include Gold River on the west coast of Vancouver Island, Sayward on the west, and Lower Mainland areas across from Campbell River.

Board Chairman Al Gorley says more than 100 compliance audits have been conducted since 1996, including more than 20 of BC Timber Sales operations, and typically very few problems are found.

He says this audit is an exception, although BC Timber Sales has committed to taking action to address the board’s concerns.

Farmers protect fish habitat in their fields

Posted on April 26, 2012August 7, 2022 by david

Valley farmers protest heavy-handed measures to protect fish

More than 25 farmers from the Fraser Valley demonstrated outside the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) headquarters in downtown Vancouver Tuesday, saying their ability to farm is being hurt because endangered fish species have colonized ditches.

See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the leader in proven science based, fish protection.

Farmers from Agassiz, Chillliwack and other parts of the Valley said fisheries officers are unreasonably restricting them from clearing or dredging ditches because they’ve been deemed fish habitat.

Ditches that aren’t kept clear can flood farmland, raise the water table and degrade the ability to grow crops or graze cattle, farmers said.

“I’m concerned for my farmland,” said Agassiz dairy farmer Gary Wikkerink, adding the allotted time each fall to conduct work in fish streams is too short.

Protesters brought two calves to the protest Tuesday to emphasize their point.

“It’s caused a lot of concern in the Agassiz area,” said Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation B.C. director Jordan Bateman, who organized the protest on behalf of farmers.

He said they want consistent enforcement of Fisheries Act rules that require setbacks and protection of fish-bearing streams.

“Fisheries officers seem to have a lot of discretion in how they interpret it,” he said. “That really bothers them.”

Bateman said farmers want to influence the outcome of Ottawa’s expected rewrite of the Fisheries Act, which environmental groups fear will seriously weaken fish habitat safeguards.

“It’s coming down to the usual battle between big business and environmental values,” he said. “Nobody is looking at how it affects small farm property owners.”

The Canadian Taxpayers’ Federation has launched a petition calling for Fisheries Act reform to support farmers.

Farmers aren’t the only ones affected.

One Agassiz home owner said a new 30-metre construction setback from a creek that runs through his land means he would not have space to rebuild if his house ever burns down.

“If they get the setback they want, it makes the my value of my place disappear,” Alan Callander said. “It makes it worthless.”

Wilderness Committee policy director Gwen Barlee said farmers may have some legitimate concerns over fishery issues.

“But we don’t want to be rolling back environmental standards,” she said. “If we can’t protect fish habitat, there’s no way to protect fish.”

Ecojustice staff scientist Susan Pinkus said recovery strategies launched by the federal fisheries department to protect two endangered species found in small Valley streams – the Salish sucker and the Nooksack dace – may have angered farmers, because the department mishandled communications with those affected.

She said only one per cent of the critical habitat of the Salish sucker is in ditches, although some streams also run through farms, triggering large setbacks.

Fisheries and Oceans Canada officials could not be reached for comment.

– files from Jeff Nagel

625 Scientists Oppose Fisheries Act Changes to Habitat Protection

Posted on March 27, 2012August 7, 2022 by david

CANADA – A group of 625 scientists have written to the Canadian government expressing concern that habitat protections are about to be removed from Section 35 of the Fisheries Act.

The scientists believe that removing the habitat protections would jeopardise many important fish stocks and the lakes, estuaries and rivers that support them.

“Weakening habitat protections will negatively impact water quality and fisheries across the country, and could undermine Canada’s attempt to maintain international credibility in the environment.”

Since the plans were first revealed, they have come under constant criticism from the industry and others who believe that changes will facilitate approvals for oil sands projects like the Enbridge Northern Gateway pipeline. See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the leader in proven science based, fish protection.

The letter states that fish habitat is the most common reason for species decline.

Concluding the scientists said that all species are of ecological value, referring to the government’s plans to only protect fish habitat for “fisheries of economic, cultural and ecological value.”

“It is critical that any changes do not jeopardise the environmental support system on which we and future generations depend.”

TheFishSite News Desk

International Investigation of Canada’s Farmed Fish Operations

Posted on February 7, 2012August 7, 2022 by david

For Immediate Release, February 7, 2012

Contact:

Jeff Miller, Center for Biological Diversity, (415) 669-7357
Alexandra Morton, Pacific Coast Wild Salmon Society, (250) 974-7086
Chief Bob Chamberlin, Kwikwasu’tinuxw Haxwa’mis First Nation, (250) 974-8282
Zeke Grader, Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, (415) 561-5080 x 224

Petition Seeks International Investigation of Canada’s Farmed Fish Operations, Protections for Wild Salmon

NAFTA Panel Asked to Investigate Canadian Violation of Wildlife Law

SAN FRANCISCO— Conservation, fishing and native groups in Canada and the United States filed a formal petition today requesting an international investigation into Canada’s failure to protect wild salmon in British Columbia from disease and parasites in industrial fish feedlots. The petition was submitted to the Commission for Environmental Cooperation under the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation — an environmental side agreement to the North American Free Trade Agreement — and seeks enforcement of Canada’s Fisheries Act.

“The Canadian inquiry into the collapse of Fraser River sockeye, the largest salmon-producing river in the world, suggests the primarily Norwegian-owned British Columbia salmon-farming industry exerts trade pressures that exceed Canada’s political will to protect wild salmon,” said biologist Alexandra Morton with the Pacific Coast Wild Salmon Society. “Releasing viruses into native ecosystems is an irrevocable threat to biodiversity, yet Canada seems to have no mechanism to prevent salmon-farm diseases from afflicting wild salmon throughout the entire North Pacific.”

Canada has permitted more than 100 industrial salmon feedlots in British Columbia to operate along wild salmon migration routes, exposing ecologically and economically valuable salmon runs to epidemics of disease, parasites, toxic chemicals and concentrated waste. The petition documents Canada’s failure to enforce the Fisheries Act in allowing industrial aquaculture to erode the capacity of ecosystems to support wild salmon. The proliferation of salmon feedlots is linked to dramatic declines in British Columbia’s wild salmon populations and the detection of a lethal salmon virus.

“Fish farms in Canada are an unholy marriage between various levels of the Canadian governments and foreign-owned companies,” said Chief Bob Chamberlain of the Kwikwasu’tinuxw Haxwa’mis First Nation. “We continue to explore, identify and act upon whatever means possible to rid our traditional territories of open net cage fish farms.”

“The Canadian government’s disregard for wild salmon stocks in pandering to multinational salmon farming corporations is outrageous,” said Zeke Grader, director of the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations. “Salmon feedlots put wild salmon, the communities that depend upon them, a billion-dollar fishing industry, tens of thousands of fishing jobs, and our nations’ shared natural heritage at risk of extinction.”

“Industrial salmon feedlots function as disease-breeding factories, allowing parasites and diseases to reproduce at unnaturally high rates,” said Jeff Miller with the Center for Biological Diversity. “Marine feedlot waste flows directly, untreated, into contact with wild salmon. Putting feedlots hosting a toxic soup of bacteria, parasites, viruses and sea lice on wild fish migration routes is the height of biological insanity.”

When a country signatory to NAFTA fails to enforce its environmental laws, any party may petition for enforcement. Canada’s Fisheries Act prohibits harmful alteration, disruption or destruction of fish habitat or addition of “deleterious substances.” The petitioners seek an investigation and finding by the Commission for Environmental Cooperation that Canada is violating its Fisheries Act with regard to industrial aquaculture. Such a finding could lead to international action to force Canada to protect wild salmon, ideally by relocating fish aquaculture into contained tanks on land.

See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the leader in science based, proven, fish protection.

“Applying the Fisheries Act to fish feedlots as it is applied to all other marine users and removing feedlots from salmon migration routes will benefit wild fish and the economy of British Columbia,” said Miller. “Moving to contained aquaculture on land will benefit areas starved for employment and clean up the rivers to restore wild salmon runs.”

Scientific evidence of harm to wild salmon swimming through B.C. waters from fish feedlots has been mounting, as has public concern that feedlots could spread epidemic diseases. This is a threat that jeopardizes the health of every wild salmon run along the Pacific Coast, since U.S. and Canadian stocks mingle in the ocean and estuaries.

The Canadian petitioners are the Pacific Coast Wild Salmon Society in B.C. and Kwikwasu’tinuxw Haxwa’mis First Nation, a native tribe whose territory off northern Vancouver Island is being used by 27 Norwegian-owned salmon feedlots. The U.S. petitioners are the Center for Biological Diversity and Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen’s Associations, the largest trade association of commercial fishers on the west coast, representing family fishing men and women. The University of Denver Environmental Law Clinic helped prepare and submit the petition.

Sturgeon need more fish habitat

Posted on February 7, 2012August 7, 2022 by david

Environment File

JORDAN VERLAGE/St. Albert Gazette

Scientists say some 600 fish found dead this week by the sewer outfall closest to the city’s cenotaph likely died of winterkill from a lack of oxygen in the Sturgeon River.

Science team spots fish kill

Local scientists had their sleuthing hats on this week after hundreds of silvery fish turned up dead in the Sturgeon River. See the dozens of unique artificial fish habitat models, fish attractors and fish cover used at fishiding.com, the leader in science based, proven, fish protection.

Public works staff and researchers from the Northern Alberta Institute of Technology (NAIT) recovered several sack-loads of dead fish from a sewer outfall by St. Albert Place Thursday morning.

A man walking a dog first spotted the fish last weekend, says Laurie Hunt, the associate chair of biological science technology at NAIT who is running a 10-year study of the Sturgeon River. The unidentified man alerted a team of NAIT researchers who happened to be taking water samples on the river at the time, and they investigated.

The team found roughly 600 dead fish by the sewer outfall closest to the city’s cenotaph, Hunt says — some floating in the open water, others frozen under the ice. “The whole little channel was full of them.” While most were minnow-sized sticklebacks, there were also a fair number of larger fish such as northern pike and white sucker.

Hunt told city officials on Wednesday, who in turn called in Alberta Fish and Wildlife fisheries biologist Daryl Watters.

Watters, who examined the site, says the fish appear to be victims of winterkill — a relatively common occurrence in shallow rivers like the Sturgeon.

“It’s unfortunate, since you don’t want to see young small fish like that taken out before they can contribute, but it happens.”

Winterkill happens when fish crowd into too small an area, such as the small bit of open water by most outfalls, use up all the oxygen there and die. Readings taken by the NAIT team suggest that the water next to the outfall has much more oxygen in it than that in the rest of the Sturgeon, which may have attracted the fish.

The NAIT team has collected the fish with the province’s permission for further study, Hunt says. The team is studying the sex ratios of fish in the Sturgeon to check for signs of gender-bending pollutants.

“We didn’t have a lot of success catching fish this summer,” she says, but this discovery has handily solved that problem.

Winterkill incidents like this illustrate the importance of having diverse fish habitat, Hunt says — if the Sturgeon had a better mix of shallow and deep spots, these fish may have had a better chance of surviving.

“It also emphasizes the importance of beavers,” she adds, as their dams create deep, oxygenated pools in which fish can survive over winter.

StructureSpot

Category: Canadian fish habitat