Sea Lice and Fish Farming in a Globalized Economy
Mitigating the Impact of Aquaculture on Wild Salmon in British Columbia
Policy networks and policy tools will be of extreme importance to mitigate the negative impacts of aquaculture and save British Columbia's wild pink and chum salmon stocks. By implementing a precautionary approach, policy actors in the government of British Columbia can ensure the survival of wild salmon and the economic and ecological benefits that come to human and nonhuman users from a healthy wild salmon ecosystem.
ISSUE
The pacific coast of British Columbia (B.C.) has become a sought after location for multinational aquaculture operations because of the abundance of inlets and rivers able to host fish farms and direct market access to the United States under NAFTA (Hoogensen, G. 2008. Chapter 6, Howlett and Brownsey). Initially, small fish farms were developed, funded by B.C. provincial government subsidies for small business and agricultural tax incentives, but as the market changed so too did the make up of aquaculture operations. Large multinationals began buying up smaller operations and expanding their domain. Currently, 90% of B.C.'s salmon farm licenses are controlled by a Norwegian triad of companies Cermaq, Marine Harvest, and Greig Seafoods (Straight, 2006). Furthermore, fish farms have grown both in number and in concentration. Along an 80 km stretch (see Figure 1) of the Broughton archipelago there are over 20 fish farms, some, with more than 1 million fish in open net fish pens (Straight, 2006).
BACKGROUND
Since 2002, the scientific community studying aquaculture and its effects on wild B.C. salmon (www.wildbcsalmon.org) were aware of the negative impacts that sea lice from fish farms were having on wild stocks. Early fears have been further confirmed by several scientists (Krkosek and Morton, 2007) who have predicted that sea lice from net-pen salmon-farming could wipe out wild salmon in four years if current business practices prevail. This is one of the latest in a series of warnings regarding the adverse impacts current fish farming practices are having on wild salmon stocks.
In the Broughton archipelago, west of northern Vancouver Island at the mouth of Knight Inlet sea, salmon smolts have been decimated by sea lice as they pass through a gauntlet of fish-farms on their way out to the ocean (Straight, 2006). Sea lice, that infest adult salmon in fish-farms, are far more deadly to baby salmon, called fry or smolt (see Figure 2), that do not yet have hard scales which help protect adult salmon from the sea lice. Research by Alexandria Morton (2005) the director of the field station in the Broughton archipelago has found that as few as two sea lice can be lethal to smolts, however, her research found some salmon smolts with as many as 20 sea lice attached.
IMPLICATIONS
The mortality of wild salmon can be largely blamed on fish farming practices since, in nature and apart from humans, sea lice do not pose a risk to smolts. This is because, in nature, adult salmon do not occupy river and estuary areas where salmon smolts and fry pass-by on their journey out to the ocean. Research by Morton and Routledge (2005) have found 80% mortality rates for smolts passing fish farms infested with sea lice. With so few salmon reaching the ocean the numbers of wild salmon are crashing and the new generation of salmon breading is severely reduced. Krkosek (2007) has published his research on projections of extinction in Science, a respected journal, showing his findings. He has predicted that Wild Salmon numbers will be reduced to one percent of historic levels within four to five years if current sea lice populations are not reduced in sensitive migratory routes (Reuters, December 16, 2007).
The impact of this would be catastrophic as it would affect many other species that rely on salmon for food including bears, eagles, coyotes and whales. The cost of a collapse to salmon stocks would also destroy much of the nature based tourism that exists in the region which is estimated by the Wilderness Tourism Association (WTA) to be around $700 million in revenues annually (Straight, March 6, 2008). Without grizzly bears feeding off salmon there is no bear watching and without salmon there is no salmon run to draw nature based tourists, not to mention the unseen environmental and ecological cost that would incurred.
POLICY CONTEXT
In 1995 the BC government placed a moratorium on fish farm license to mitigate the effect of fish farms on wild stocks, however, the policy backfired and aquaculture operations increased stock numbers in existing fish farms (Howlett M, Rayner J. 2003). Legislation was problematic since it lacked any caps on the number of fish allowed in existing aquaculture operation. The concentration of fish in the Broughton archipelago continued to increase leading to greater depletion of wild salmon stocks (Hoogensen in Chapter 6 Howlett and Brownsey, 2008). The increased concentration of fish farms in the archipelago created a feeding ground for sea lice and a significant hazard for smolts on migratory routes. In 2002, the provincial government overturned the moratorium expanding fish farm operations and, simultaneously, cutting funding to monitoring and enforcement programs, transferring responsibility onto industry to self regulate (Living Oceans Society).
POLICY NETWORKS
The WTA, who has claimed that they will be adversely affected by a collapse of wild salmon stocks, have funded research on river ecology and lobbied Norwegian multinational share-holders for alternative aquaculture practices (Straight, March 6, 2007). Multinationals have thus far been unwilling to remove net-pen fish-farms claiming they are taking action by improving fish net security and using pharmaceutical drugs to fight sea lice infestations. Historically, the two main policy agents in B.C.'s aquaculture industry are the B.C. fisheries department and Norwegian multinationals who acted in partnership to promote and expand the aquaculture industry. The B.C. government promoted the aquaculture industry as a strategy to move B.C.'s economy to a post staples economy, while aquaculture corporations have been allowed to heavily influenced aquaculture policy in the province because of their economic contribution to the province.
Both the Wilderness Tourism Association and environmentalists have called on government to place a moratorium on further licenses, implement meaningful limits on the concentrations and numbers of fish farms allowed in sensitive salmon migratory routes and a commitment by the industry to move existing fish farms away from sensitive migratory routes. In response, the provincial government created a scientific body to study the issue. The appointed B.C. Pacific Salmon Forum recommended moving fish farms out of sensitive areas to test if salmon would make a comeback; however, according to key scientists on the panel, industry has impeded effective scientific research by refusing to come to the table (wildbcsalmon.org). Meanwhile industry has launched a campaign contesting current peer reviewed scientific studies showing the impact of farm fish to wild salmon stocks. All three of the Pacific Salmon Forum's lead scientists have resigned out of frustration with industry, claiming they are not cooperating in providing necessary information on numbers fish in farms, numbers of sea lice, and the quantity of pharmaceuticals used to fight sea lice. Industry has also refused to allow pens be left empty to provide a control group in the archipelago, which is necessary to discern causality. Despite the objections by the original scientist on the panel the government Forum replaced the scientists and continues to study the issue in a limited capacity. A lead scientist said that when he realized industry was not on board and that The Pacific Salmon Forum would not be able to make meaningful headway without industry he did not want to lend his name to the credibility of the study.
Environmentalists, natural fisheries, and tourism appear to be in conflict with industry that is said to be decimating wild salmon stocks. The provincial government is the only body able to deal with the conflict but is in a difficult situation. On the one hand, the B.C. government has for a long time been proponents and supporters of aquaculture in the way of subsidies and tax incentives and, on the other hand, responsible for monitoring and ensuring the protection of fisheries. Other players involved include the government of Alaska that prohibits farm-fishing and has a thriving wild fish industry which they are seeking to protect. They have requested that the government of B.C. not grant further licenses for fish farms near the Alaska B.C. border fearing disease often associated with fish farms could contaminate wild stocks and damage their wild salmon fishery. Further expansion of B.C. aquaculture could lead to greater conflict between B.C. and Alaska. Industry has argued that they are taking measures to reduce fish escapes from pens, and have increased use of drugs to combat sea lice, but have been unwilling to provide possibly damning evidence by complying with government research. Furthermore, the transnational Mainstreem has recently been granted additional 20 year licenses for fish farm operations along the northern B.C. coast that could further exacerbate existing environmental uncertainty.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 'business as usual' approach is unacceptable and government can not wait for industry to comply with research before necessary research is done. We are recommending the following.
That:
• Fish farming in sensitive areas be moved to pen farming, or move away from streams and inlets.
• Stakeholder boards like exist in Nova Scotia be created to resolve conflict and support best practices
• Immediate removal of farm fish from sensitive salmon migratory routes, with a commitment to relocate those farms in the future
• A moratorium on new net-cage fish farms on the coast until peer-reviewed science shows “minimal or no impact on wild fish stocks”;
• Industry must show a willingness to support the development and testing of new fish-farming technology.
CONCLUSION
A transition to closed-containment technology was one of the key recommendations made by the Special Committee on Sustainable Aquaculture, which held public hearings in 20 coastal communities before submitting its final report to the province in May 2007. Immediate Precautionary action should be implemented to avoid a fate similar to that of the Atlantic Cod fishery that cost 40,000 jobs and high costs of welfare funding needed to combat the social problems that resulted from massive job loss. In B.C. employment by aquaculture is declining as mechanization makes fish farming more profitable, meanwhile, wilderness tourism is employing ever more people from wilderness guides and interpreters to hotel and restaurant staff to accommodate the increasing wilderness tourism industry. Government is able to make important decisions now that will have long lasting effects and can ensure a sustainable aquaculture industry, without sacrificing the ecological integrity of the Broughton archipelago area or the lively-hoods that depend on it.
REFERENCES
Cox S. Tyee. March 1, 2006. Push North for Fish Farms Blocked. A Tyee Special Report. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from HYPERLINK "http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/03/01/PushNorthFishFarm/" http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/03/01/PushNorthFishFarm/
Dart, Jennifer. May 2, 2007. Mainstream gets 20-year approvals for nine fish farm sites. The Westerly News. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from
Goldburg R, Naylor R. 2005. Future seascapes, fishing, and fish farming. Ecol Environ 3(1): 21-28
Government of British Columbia. John van Dongen. 2002. WHY B.C. LIFTED THE MORATORIUM ON FISH FARMS. Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/nrm_news_releases/2002AGF0020-000827.htm
Hamouda, L., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., Noakes, D.J., Fang, L., and McDaniels, T. 2005. The salmon aquaculture conflict in British Columbia: A graph model analysis. Ocean and Coastal Management. 48(7-8):571-587
Hoogensen, G. 2008. Chapter 6 - The Canadian Fisheries Industry: Retrospect and Prospect. Canada's Resource Economy in Transition: The Past, Present, and Future of Canadian Staples Industries. Editors Howlett and Brownsey, 2008, Emond Montgomery Publications Limited Toronto, Canada.
Howlett M, Rayner J. 2003. (Not so) "Smart regulation"? Canadian shellfish aquaculture policy and the evolution of instrument choice for industrial development. Department of Political Science, Simon Frazer University, Burnaby B.C., Canada VSA 1S6. Maritime Policy 28 (2004) 171-184.
Krkosek M, Lewis M.A., Morton A, Frazer L.N., Volpe J.P. 2006. Epizootics of wild fish induced by farm fish. PNAS.
Living Oceans Society. Summer 2002. Fish Farm Moratorium Lifted. Rising Tide Newsletter. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://livingoceans.org/newsletter%20files/summer%202002.pdf
Morten A, Routledge M. 2005. Motality Rates for Juvinle Pink Oncerhynchus gorbusha and Chum O. keta Salkmon Infested with Sea Lice Lepeophtheirus salmonis in the Broughton Archipelago. Alaska Fishery Research Bulletin 11(2):146-152
Morton, A. 2002. Sea Lice Outbreak in the Broughton Archipelago. Raincoast Research. L iving Oceans Society Newsletter. Summer 2002. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://livingoceans.org/newsletter%20files/summer%202002.pdf
Reuter (2007, December 16). Fish Farms Drive Wild Salmon Populations Toward Extinction. ScienceDaily. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2007/12/071213152606.htm
Straight (2008, March 6). B.C. tourism operators raise alarm over sea lice. Andrew Findlay. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from HYPERLINK "http://www.straight.com/article-13805/tourism-operators-raise-alarm-over-sea-lice" http://www.straight.com/article-13805/tourism-operators-raise-alarm-over-sea-lice
Tourism Vancouver Island. Photo retrieved March 10, 2008, from http://www.vancouverisland.travel/north-island/
Wild B.C. Salmon. Website. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from HYPERLINK "http://www.wildbcsalmon.ca/Sealice/Story.html" http://www.wildbcsalmon.ca/Sealice/Story.html
FIGURES
Figure 1.
INCLUDEPICTURE "http://www.vancouverisland.travel/img/regions/north-island.jpg" \* MERGEFORMATINET
Photo Credit: Tourism Vancouver Island
Figure 2.
INCLUDEPICTURE "http://www.wildbcsalmon.ca/Sealice/files/page17_2.jpg" \* MERGEFORMATINET
Photo credit: Alexandra Morton - Sea Lice on Salmon Smolt
Policy networks and policy tools will be of extreme importance to mitigate the negative impacts of aquaculture and save British Columbia's wild pink and chum salmon stocks. By implementing a precautionary approach, policy actors in the government of British Columbia can ensure the survival of wild salmon and the economic and ecological benefits that come to human and nonhuman users from a healthy wild salmon ecosystem.
ISSUE
The pacific coast of British Columbia (B.C.) has become a sought after location for multinational aquaculture operations because of the abundance of inlets and rivers able to host fish farms and direct market access to the United States under NAFTA (Hoogensen, G. 2008. Chapter 6, Howlett and Brownsey). Initially, small fish farms were developed, funded by B.C. provincial government subsidies for small business and agricultural tax incentives, but as the market changed so too did the make up of aquaculture operations. Large multinationals began buying up smaller operations and expanding their domain. Currently, 90% of B.C.'s salmon farm licenses are controlled by a Norwegian triad of companies Cermaq, Marine Harvest, and Greig Seafoods (Straight, 2006). Furthermore, fish farms have grown both in number and in concentration. Along an 80 km stretch (see Figure 1) of the Broughton archipelago there are over 20 fish farms, some, with more than 1 million fish in open net fish pens (Straight, 2006).
BACKGROUND
Since 2002, the scientific community studying aquaculture and its effects on wild B.C. salmon (www.wildbcsalmon.org) were aware of the negative impacts that sea lice from fish farms were having on wild stocks. Early fears have been further confirmed by several scientists (Krkosek and Morton, 2007) who have predicted that sea lice from net-pen salmon-farming could wipe out wild salmon in four years if current business practices prevail. This is one of the latest in a series of warnings regarding the adverse impacts current fish farming practices are having on wild salmon stocks.
In the Broughton archipelago, west of northern Vancouver Island at the mouth of Knight Inlet sea, salmon smolts have been decimated by sea lice as they pass through a gauntlet of fish-farms on their way out to the ocean (Straight, 2006). Sea lice, that infest adult salmon in fish-farms, are far more deadly to baby salmon, called fry or smolt (see Figure 2), that do not yet have hard scales which help protect adult salmon from the sea lice. Research by Alexandria Morton (2005) the director of the field station in the Broughton archipelago has found that as few as two sea lice can be lethal to smolts, however, her research found some salmon smolts with as many as 20 sea lice attached.
IMPLICATIONS
The mortality of wild salmon can be largely blamed on fish farming practices since, in nature and apart from humans, sea lice do not pose a risk to smolts. This is because, in nature, adult salmon do not occupy river and estuary areas where salmon smolts and fry pass-by on their journey out to the ocean. Research by Morton and Routledge (2005) have found 80% mortality rates for smolts passing fish farms infested with sea lice. With so few salmon reaching the ocean the numbers of wild salmon are crashing and the new generation of salmon breading is severely reduced. Krkosek (2007) has published his research on projections of extinction in Science, a respected journal, showing his findings. He has predicted that Wild Salmon numbers will be reduced to one percent of historic levels within four to five years if current sea lice populations are not reduced in sensitive migratory routes (Reuters, December 16, 2007).
The impact of this would be catastrophic as it would affect many other species that rely on salmon for food including bears, eagles, coyotes and whales. The cost of a collapse to salmon stocks would also destroy much of the nature based tourism that exists in the region which is estimated by the Wilderness Tourism Association (WTA) to be around $700 million in revenues annually (Straight, March 6, 2008). Without grizzly bears feeding off salmon there is no bear watching and without salmon there is no salmon run to draw nature based tourists, not to mention the unseen environmental and ecological cost that would incurred.
POLICY CONTEXT
In 1995 the BC government placed a moratorium on fish farm license to mitigate the effect of fish farms on wild stocks, however, the policy backfired and aquaculture operations increased stock numbers in existing fish farms (Howlett M, Rayner J. 2003). Legislation was problematic since it lacked any caps on the number of fish allowed in existing aquaculture operation. The concentration of fish in the Broughton archipelago continued to increase leading to greater depletion of wild salmon stocks (Hoogensen in Chapter 6 Howlett and Brownsey, 2008). The increased concentration of fish farms in the archipelago created a feeding ground for sea lice and a significant hazard for smolts on migratory routes. In 2002, the provincial government overturned the moratorium expanding fish farm operations and, simultaneously, cutting funding to monitoring and enforcement programs, transferring responsibility onto industry to self regulate (Living Oceans Society).
POLICY NETWORKS
The WTA, who has claimed that they will be adversely affected by a collapse of wild salmon stocks, have funded research on river ecology and lobbied Norwegian multinational share-holders for alternative aquaculture practices (Straight, March 6, 2007). Multinationals have thus far been unwilling to remove net-pen fish-farms claiming they are taking action by improving fish net security and using pharmaceutical drugs to fight sea lice infestations. Historically, the two main policy agents in B.C.'s aquaculture industry are the B.C. fisheries department and Norwegian multinationals who acted in partnership to promote and expand the aquaculture industry. The B.C. government promoted the aquaculture industry as a strategy to move B.C.'s economy to a post staples economy, while aquaculture corporations have been allowed to heavily influenced aquaculture policy in the province because of their economic contribution to the province.
Both the Wilderness Tourism Association and environmentalists have called on government to place a moratorium on further licenses, implement meaningful limits on the concentrations and numbers of fish farms allowed in sensitive salmon migratory routes and a commitment by the industry to move existing fish farms away from sensitive migratory routes. In response, the provincial government created a scientific body to study the issue. The appointed B.C. Pacific Salmon Forum recommended moving fish farms out of sensitive areas to test if salmon would make a comeback; however, according to key scientists on the panel, industry has impeded effective scientific research by refusing to come to the table (wildbcsalmon.org). Meanwhile industry has launched a campaign contesting current peer reviewed scientific studies showing the impact of farm fish to wild salmon stocks. All three of the Pacific Salmon Forum's lead scientists have resigned out of frustration with industry, claiming they are not cooperating in providing necessary information on numbers fish in farms, numbers of sea lice, and the quantity of pharmaceuticals used to fight sea lice. Industry has also refused to allow pens be left empty to provide a control group in the archipelago, which is necessary to discern causality. Despite the objections by the original scientist on the panel the government Forum replaced the scientists and continues to study the issue in a limited capacity. A lead scientist said that when he realized industry was not on board and that The Pacific Salmon Forum would not be able to make meaningful headway without industry he did not want to lend his name to the credibility of the study.
Environmentalists, natural fisheries, and tourism appear to be in conflict with industry that is said to be decimating wild salmon stocks. The provincial government is the only body able to deal with the conflict but is in a difficult situation. On the one hand, the B.C. government has for a long time been proponents and supporters of aquaculture in the way of subsidies and tax incentives and, on the other hand, responsible for monitoring and ensuring the protection of fisheries. Other players involved include the government of Alaska that prohibits farm-fishing and has a thriving wild fish industry which they are seeking to protect. They have requested that the government of B.C. not grant further licenses for fish farms near the Alaska B.C. border fearing disease often associated with fish farms could contaminate wild stocks and damage their wild salmon fishery. Further expansion of B.C. aquaculture could lead to greater conflict between B.C. and Alaska. Industry has argued that they are taking measures to reduce fish escapes from pens, and have increased use of drugs to combat sea lice, but have been unwilling to provide possibly damning evidence by complying with government research. Furthermore, the transnational Mainstreem has recently been granted additional 20 year licenses for fish farm operations along the northern B.C. coast that could further exacerbate existing environmental uncertainty.
RECOMMENDATIONS
The 'business as usual' approach is unacceptable and government can not wait for industry to comply with research before necessary research is done. We are recommending the following.
That:
• Fish farming in sensitive areas be moved to pen farming, or move away from streams and inlets.
• Stakeholder boards like exist in Nova Scotia be created to resolve conflict and support best practices
• Immediate removal of farm fish from sensitive salmon migratory routes, with a commitment to relocate those farms in the future
• A moratorium on new net-cage fish farms on the coast until peer-reviewed science shows “minimal or no impact on wild fish stocks”;
• Industry must show a willingness to support the development and testing of new fish-farming technology.
CONCLUSION
A transition to closed-containment technology was one of the key recommendations made by the Special Committee on Sustainable Aquaculture, which held public hearings in 20 coastal communities before submitting its final report to the province in May 2007. Immediate Precautionary action should be implemented to avoid a fate similar to that of the Atlantic Cod fishery that cost 40,000 jobs and high costs of welfare funding needed to combat the social problems that resulted from massive job loss. In B.C. employment by aquaculture is declining as mechanization makes fish farming more profitable, meanwhile, wilderness tourism is employing ever more people from wilderness guides and interpreters to hotel and restaurant staff to accommodate the increasing wilderness tourism industry. Government is able to make important decisions now that will have long lasting effects and can ensure a sustainable aquaculture industry, without sacrificing the ecological integrity of the Broughton archipelago area or the lively-hoods that depend on it.
REFERENCES
Cox S. Tyee. March 1, 2006. Push North for Fish Farms Blocked. A Tyee Special Report. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from HYPERLINK "http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/03/01/PushNorthFishFarm/" http://thetyee.ca/News/2006/03/01/PushNorthFishFarm/
Dart, Jennifer. May 2, 2007. Mainstream gets 20-year approvals for nine fish farm sites. The Westerly News. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from
Goldburg R, Naylor R. 2005. Future seascapes, fishing, and fish farming. Ecol Environ 3(1): 21-28
Government of British Columbia. John van Dongen. 2002. WHY B.C. LIFTED THE MORATORIUM ON FISH FARMS. Minister of Agriculture, Food and Fisheries. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://www2.news.gov.bc.ca/nrm_news_releases/2002AGF0020-000827.htm
Hamouda, L., Hipel, K.W., Kilgour, D.M., Noakes, D.J., Fang, L., and McDaniels, T. 2005. The salmon aquaculture conflict in British Columbia: A graph model analysis. Ocean and Coastal Management. 48(7-8):571-587
Hoogensen, G. 2008. Chapter 6 - The Canadian Fisheries Industry: Retrospect and Prospect. Canada's Resource Economy in Transition: The Past, Present, and Future of Canadian Staples Industries. Editors Howlett and Brownsey, 2008, Emond Montgomery Publications Limited Toronto, Canada.
Howlett M, Rayner J. 2003. (Not so) "Smart regulation"? Canadian shellfish aquaculture policy and the evolution of instrument choice for industrial development. Department of Political Science, Simon Frazer University, Burnaby B.C., Canada VSA 1S6. Maritime Policy 28 (2004) 171-184.
Krkosek M, Lewis M.A., Morton A, Frazer L.N., Volpe J.P. 2006. Epizootics of wild fish induced by farm fish. PNAS.
Living Oceans Society. Summer 2002. Fish Farm Moratorium Lifted. Rising Tide Newsletter. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://livingoceans.org/newsletter%20files/summer%202002.pdf
Morten A, Routledge M. 2005. Motality Rates for Juvinle Pink Oncerhynchus gorbusha and Chum O. keta Salkmon Infested with Sea Lice Lepeophtheirus salmonis in the Broughton Archipelago. Alaska Fishery Research Bulletin 11(2):146-152
Morton, A. 2002. Sea Lice Outbreak in the Broughton Archipelago. Raincoast Research. L iving Oceans Society Newsletter. Summer 2002. Retrieved March 20, 2008, from http://livingoceans.org/newsletter%20files/summer%202002.pdf
Reuter (2007, December 16). Fish Farms Drive Wild Salmon Populations Toward Extinction. ScienceDaily. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2007/12/071213152606.htm
Straight (2008, March 6). B.C. tourism operators raise alarm over sea lice. Andrew Findlay. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from HYPERLINK "http://www.straight.com/article-13805/tourism-operators-raise-alarm-over-sea-lice" http://www.straight.com/article-13805/tourism-operators-raise-alarm-over-sea-lice
Tourism Vancouver Island. Photo retrieved March 10, 2008, from http://www.vancouverisland.travel/north-island/
Wild B.C. Salmon. Website. Retrieved March 10, 2008, from HYPERLINK "http://www.wildbcsalmon.ca/Sealice/Story.html" http://www.wildbcsalmon.ca/Sealice/Story.html
FIGURES
Figure 1.
INCLUDEPICTURE "http://www.vancouverisland.travel/img/regions/north-island.jpg" \* MERGEFORMATINET
Photo Credit: Tourism Vancouver Island
Figure 2.
INCLUDEPICTURE "http://www.wildbcsalmon.ca/Sealice/files/page17_2.jpg" \* MERGEFORMATINET
Photo credit: Alexandra Morton - Sea Lice on Salmon Smolt
posted by Michael at 11:21 am
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home