Photo: Have we saved the salmon? Not yet.

Watch aquatic biologist Jeffery Young explain why salmon still need help. (Credit: CTV)


It's fantastic to see that Fraser River sockeye salmon are returning in greater numbers than last year, when total abundance reached a record low.

But what does this mean? Are fisheries now sustainable? Is the judicial inquiry investigating Fraser sockeye declines no longer required? Are habitat loss, parasites and disease from open-pen fish farms, and hotter water and changing ocean conditions due to climate change no longer problems?

Unfortunately one year of good returns doesn't spell the end of trouble. First off, 2010 should be a good year for total returns. It's a "dominant" cycle year. Fraser sockeye have consistent four-year life spans — fish coming back this year are the offspring of those that returned and spawned in 2006. There isn't a lot of mixing between cycles and some cycles tend to be more abundant than others. The 2010 cycle has traditionally been the biggest, or most dominant, since early in the 20th century. In 2006 about 13 million Fraser sockeye returned.

More importantly, looking at just total returns in one year is missing what matters most. The Fraser watershed, which drains about a third of British Columbia, has numerous big, deep lakes. Most of these lakes have a unique population, or populations, of sockeye salmon. You can even see the differences between some of the populations — Stuart Lake sockeye, which travel the farthest to reach spawning grounds, are shorter, more torpedo-shaped, and firm with lots of fat, while Chilliwack Lake sockeye, which don't have to migrate very far, are longer and flatter.

There are about 40 of these distinct Fraser sockeye populations, and some of them are in trouble. Conserving all of these populations, the biodiversity of Fraser sockeye, is the key to their long-term resilience, particularly given increasing climate change impacts. Maintaining salmon biodiversity is also what gives us the best chance of achieving consistently high levels of total abundance of Fraser sockeye over many years, not just in one. The importance of protecting weak salmon stocks and the value of salmon biodiversity was recently shown in the scientific journal Nature, and discussed in a recent Globe and Mail article.

It's worth getting excited about a strong return of Fraser sockeye. But these numbers should not be seen as a sudden recovery for Fraser sockeye. This year should provide a useful starting point of the recovery of all Fraser sockeye, the strong and endangered populations, by demonstrating that given the chance sockeye salmon can thrive. Several years of improving returns and the protection of Fraser sockeye salmon diversity will be necessary to determine whether Fraser sockeye are truly recovering.

August 25, 2010

Read more

Post a comment


Aug 26, 2010
10:53 AM

So, we know that the Salmon are on a four year cycle. It’s not rocket science to me; go back historically on the “four years” take the data on the run that will co-incide with next year and use that to prognosticate, set the quotas so that they lean towards the fact that humans are notoriously greedy and set them lower to give that run a better chance to provide a better ROI on its return four years hence. Let’s get our heads out of the sand and deal with the reality; other not so good years are coming that cannot be changed but it can be managed for the benefit of all, including the sockeye. You get what you give and if you give nature a chance it will give back.

Aug 26, 2010
12:53 PM

I am curious as to where the number 13 million comes from.. According to the Fraser River Sockeye Post Season review of 2006 on Page 11 the actual numbers of returning Sockeye was only 4.74 Million, not 13 million as quoted.

Aug 27, 2010
12:53 PM

Its not just a few more than last year, but the largest run since the early 1900’s. I would suggest the scientific community refrain from claiming full knowledge of salmon life cycles and what effects it by letting go sea lice, global warming/climate change, habitat and or other calamity that was previously used to support salmon decline. Lets admit what we don’t know and question all other assumptions and then may be we won’t be so arrogant “about my science is more correct then your science”. By the way, I have been a sports fisherman for 50 years and believe if we take care of the enviornment, it will take of us.

Aug 30, 2010
12:53 PM

the fish are back and better then ever?!

Sep 16, 2010
9:27 PM

So no matter what the facts say, Global Warming will always be true.

The David Suzuki Foundation does not necessarily endorse the comments or views posted within this forum. All contributors acknowledge DSF's right to remove product/service endorsements and refuse publication of comments deemed to be offensive or that contravene our operating principles as a charitable organization. Please note that all comments are pre-moderated. Privacy Policy »