From the Anchorage Daily News today:

http://adn.com/front/story/2314232p-2372664c.html

This is scary:
"The state also will take a second look at allowing foreign processors into Alaska waters. Murkowski said Alaska fishermen would need assurances that they would be paid for their fish and processors would have to agree not to sell on the U.S. market."
Once again, our food supply would be sent overseas to keep the price US citizens pay artificially inflated.

You anint seen nothin yet, the comercial salmon fishing in this continent is comming to an end and you can give credit to fish farms.

Over the past five years or so the price has drasticly spiraled down and down. Makeing it dificult for any body to make a living. People are upset and they want fish farms closed, they put out propiganda that fish farms are gonna kill off all of the wild salmon.

Comercial fisherman need to quit crying and find new jobs if they dont like because the truth is its only gonna get worse.

Within a few years Canada will be bigger into fish farming than even Chillie or Argentina and there biggest export will be the US. Canada will be able to produce fish cheeper than anyone because like everything else they will subsidize their fish farming industry. Oh Yeah and they are gonna do pacific species.

I dont believe that Fish farms are that bad, Im sure they have some nagative impacts but their positive impacts far outway the negative.

Anyways the only gorups that talk bad about them are groups that have intrest in Comercial Fisheries. These groups are the ones that hire their own scientists to do studdys that say fish farms are very very bad.

Canada did their own 3 or 4 year study that they finished up recently to see if they were gonna go ahead with High scale fish farming or not do it due to the bad impacts. They found that the impacts were almost nonexistant. Now canada has much to risk if fish farms are bad as they make alot of money from their sport fisheries so I would tend to trust their judgement on fishfarms.

Fish Farms may just be what saves the wild salmon and steelhead.

Farmed fish is ok if you like less protein and little if any omega 3 oils

Clicked on the link but with AOL I get a warning of the currently broadcasting and IP address, someone can begin attacking your computer. So I just past on reading it.

Sound to me like the article just reinterates the importance of "Just saying No to Frankenfish."

I think it's a mistake to not look at the salmon farms with a critical eye and there is more to it than salmon farms vs commercial fisherman. There are some real concerns about their operation by scientists that don't have anything to do with the commercial fishermen. There are many potential problems that need to be looked at. The krill fishery in the Straits of Georgia that removes feed from the wild fish food source to supply salmon farms. An outbreak of sea lice associated with salmon farms in northern B.C. is highly suspected in practically wiping out a run of pink salmon. Scotland has had big problems with salmon farms spreading disease to wild stocks. These are just a few examples. All I can say about B.C. expanding it's salmon farm operations is that "money talks".

Like cattle pens, the salmon operations bring product to market cheaply. But harm to ocean life and possibly human health has experts worried.
By Kenneth R. Weiss
Times Staff Writer

December 9 2002

PORT McNEILL, Canada -- PORT McNEILL, Canada -- If you bought a salmon filet in the supermarket recently or ordered one in a restaurant, chances are it was born in a plastic tray here, or a place just like it.

Instead of streaking through the ocean or leaping up rocky streams, it spent three years like a marine couch potato, circling lazily in pens, fattening up on pellets of salmon chow.

It was vaccinated as a small fry to survive the diseases that race through these oceanic feedlots, acres of net-covered pens tethered offshore. It was likely dosed with antibiotics to ward off infection or fed pesticides to shed a beard of bloodsucking sea lice.

For that rich, pink hue, the fish was given a steady diet of synthetic pigment. Without it, the flesh of these caged salmon would be an unappetizing, pale gray.

While many chefs and seafood lovers snub the feedlot variety as inferior to wild salmon, fish farming is booming. What was once a seasonal delicacy now is sometimes as cheap as chicken and available year-round. Now, the hidden costs of mass-producing these once-wild fish are coming into focus.

Begun in Norway in the late 1960s, salmon farming has spread rapidly to cold-water inlets around the globe. Ninety-one salmon farms now operate in British Columbian waters. The number is expected to reach 200 or more in the next decade.

Industrial fish farming raises many of the same concerns about chemicals and pollutants that are associated with feedlot cattle and factory chicken farms. So far, however, government scientists worry less about the effects of antibiotics, pesticides and artificial dyes on human health than they do about damage to the marine environment.

"They're like floating pig farms," said Daniel Pauly, professor of fisheries at the University of British Columbia in Vancouver. "They consume a tremendous amount of highly concentrated protein pellets and they make a terrific mess."

Fish wastes and uneaten feed smother the sea floor beneath these farms, generating bacteria that consume oxygen vital to shellfish and other bottom-dwelling sea creatures.

Disease and parasites, which would normally exist in relatively low levels in fish scattered around the oceans, can run rampant in densely packed fish farms.

Pesticides fed to the fish and toxic copper sulfate used to keep nets free of algae are building up in sea-floor sediments. Antibiotics have created resistant strains of disease that infect both wild and domesticated fish.

Clouds of sea lice, incubated by captive fish on farms, swarm wild salmon as they swim past on their migration to the ocean.

Of all the concerns, the biggest turns out to be a problem fish farms were supposed to help alleviate: the depletion of marine life from overfishing.

These fish farms contribute to the problem because the captive salmon must be fed. Salmon are carnivores and, unlike vegetarian catfish that are fed grain on farms, they need to eat fish to bulk up fast and remain healthy.

It takes about 2.4 pounds of wild fish to produce one pound of farmed salmon, according to Rosamond L. Naylor, an agricultural economist at Stanford's Center for Environmental Science and Policy.

That means grinding up a lot of sardines, anchovies, mackerel, herring and other fish to produce the oil and meal compressed into pellets of salmon chow.

"We are not taking strain off wild fisheries. We are adding to it," Naylor said. "This cannot be sustained forever."

In British Columbia, the industry, under pressure from environmentalists, marine scientists and local newspapers, is taking steps to mitigate some of the ecological problems.

"We have made some mistakes in the past and we acknowledge them," said Mary Ellen Walling, executive director of the British Columbia Salmon Farmers Assn. "We feel the industry is sustainable, if well-managed, and we have a code of practices that is followed by all of our member companies."

Nearly 30 farms are preparing to move to less ecologically fragile areas, under orders from Canadian authorities.

Some farms have installed underwater video cameras to detect when fish quit feeding, so workers can stop scattering food pellets. Many farms are switching to sturdier nets to stop fish from escaping and keep out marauding sea lions, which are shot if they penetrate the perimeter.

The industry now recognizes that it will soon be pushing the limits of the ocean.

"There will come a time when our industry will use more of the fish oil and fish meal than is available," said Odd Grydeland, an executive at Heritage Salmon in British Columbia. "Our biggest challenge is to find substitute grains for fish meal and fish oil."

Farm-raised salmon now dominates West Coast markets, arriving daily from Canada and Chile. About 80% of the salmon grown in British Columbia goes to markets from Seattle to Los Angeles.

The salmon industry took off so fast in British Columbia in the 1980s that the provincial government, worried about the environmental toll, imposed a ban in 1995 on any new farms.

The industry responded by stuffing, on average, twice as many fish into each farm. Today, farms typically put 50,000 to 90,000 fish in a pen 100 feet by 100 feet. A single farm can grow 400,000 fish. Others raise a million or more.

The moratorium on new farms was lifted in September by the provincial government after voters elected a pro-business slate of lawmakers and administrators. As a result, 10 to 15 farms are expected to open each year over the next decade.

Five international companies -- three of them based in Norway -- control most of the existing farms. Nearly all are situated around Vancouver Island, which begins outside Seattle's Puget Sound and extends up the coast for 300 miles.

It's a lightly populated place of stunning beauty. Cedar, hemlock and Douglas fir grow right down to the high-water mark.

Massive tides flush rich blue-green waters through the archipelago of islands, straits, bays and inlets, nurturing five types of wild salmon. These, in turn, attract seals, sea lions, white-sided dolphins and the world's best known pods of killer whales.

Residents rely on boats and seaplanes to reach surrounding islands that host many of the farms. Each farm is a cluster of pens, often interconnected by metal walkways and tethered offshore by a lattice of steel cables, floats and weights.

In the midst of this idyllic setting, signs of strain on the marine environment are bubbling to the surface much the way diseases and parasites, incubated in European salmon farms, fouled the fiords of Norway and the lochs of Scotland.

In Norway, parasites have so devastated wild fish that the government poisoned all aquatic life in dozens of rivers and streams in an effort to re-boot the ecological system.

"The Norwegian companies are transferring the same operations here that have been used in Europe," said Pauly, the fisheries professor. "So we can infer that every mistake that has been done in Norway and Scotland will be replicated here."

Dale Blackburn, vice president of West Coast operations for Norwegian-based Stolt Sea Farm, said his staff works very closely with its counterparts in Norway. But, he said, "It's ridiculous to think we don't learn from our mistakes and transfer technology blindly."

Still, more than a dozen farms in British Columbia have been stricken by infectious hematopoietic necrosis, a virus that attacks the kidneys and spleen of fish.

Jeanine Siemens, manager of a Stolt farm, said, "It was really hard for me and the crew" to oversee the killing of 900,000 young salmon last August because of a viral outbreak.

"We had a boat pumping dead fish every day," she said. "It took a couple of weeks. But it was the best decision. You are at risk of infecting other farms."

Farms are typically required to bury the dead in landfills to protect wild marine life and the environment. But Grieg Seafood recently got an emergency permit from the Canadian government to dump in the Pacific 900 tons of salmon killed by a toxic algae bloom. The emergency? The weight of the dead fish threatened to sink the entire farm.

About 1 million live Atlantic salmon -- favored by farmers because they grow fast and can be packed in tight quarters -- have escaped through holes in nets and storm-wrecked farms in the Pacific Northwest.

Biologists fear these invaders will out-compete Pacific salmon and trout for food and territory, hastening the demise of the native fish. An Atlantic salmon takeover could knock nature's balance out of whack and turn a healthy, diverse marine habitat into one dominated by a single invasive species.

Preserving diversity is essential, biologists say, because multiple species of salmon have a better chance of surviving than just one.

John Volpe, a fisheries ecologist at the University of Alberta, has been swimming rivers with snorkel and mask to document the spread of Atlantic salmon and their offspring.

"In the majority of rivers, I find Atlantic salmon," Volpe said. "We know they are out there; we just don't know how many, or what to do about them."

His research focuses on how Atlantic salmon can colonize, if given a chance. It has terrified the U.S. neighbors to the north. Alaskan officials banned fish farms in 1990 to protect their wild fishery. So they don't take kindly to British Columbian farms creeping toward their southern border.

Although native Pacific salmon are rare and endangered in the Lower 48, Alaska's salmon fisheries are so healthy they have earned the Marine Stewardship Council's eco-label as "sustainable." The council's labels are designed to guide consumers to species that are not being overharvested.

Recently, the prospect of genetically modified salmon that can grow six times faster than normal fish has heightened anxiety. Aqua Bounty Farms Inc., of Waltham, Mass., is seeking U.S. and Canadian approval to alter genes to produce a growth hormone that could shave a year off the usual 2 1/2 to three years it takes to raise a market-size fish.

Commercial fishermen and other critics fear that these "frankenfish" will escape and pose an even greater danger to native species than do the Atlantic salmon.

"Nobody can predict just what that means for our wild salmon," Alaska Gov. Tony Knowles said. "We do see it as a threat."

Canadian commercial fishermen, initially supportive of salmon farms, have grown increasingly hostile. They were stunned in August when their nets came up nearly empty during the first day of the wild pink salmon season in the Broughton Archipelago at the northeast end of Vancouver Island.

"There should have been millions of pinks, but there were fewer than anyone can remember," said Calvin Siider, a salmon gill-netter. "We can't prove that sea lice caused it. But common sense tells you something, if they are covered by sea lice as babies, and they don't come back as adults."

Alexandra Morton, an independent biologist and critic of salmon farms, began examining sea lice in 2001 when a fishermen brought her two baby pink salmon covered with them.

Collecting more than 700 baby pink salmon around farms, she found that 78% were covered with a fatal load of sea lice, which burrow into fish and feed on skin, mucous and blood. Juvenile salmon she netted farther from the farms were largely lice-free.

Bud Graham, British Columbia's assistant deputy minister of agriculture, food and fisheries, called this a "unique phenomenon."

"We have not seen that before. We really don't understand it," he said. "We've not had sea lice problems in our waters, compared to Scotland and Ireland."

Salmon farmers point out that the sea louse exists in the wild. Their captive fish are unlikely hosts, the farmers say, because at the first sign of an outbreak, they add the pesticide emamectin benzoate to the feed.

Under Canadian rules, farmers must halt the use of pesticides 25 days before harvest to make sure all residues are flushed from the fish. If that's done, officials said, pesticides should pose no danger to consumers.

European health officials have debated whether there is any human health risk from synthetic pigment added to the feed to give farmed salmon their pink hue.

In the wild, salmon absorb carotenoid from eating pink krill. On the farm, they get canthaxanthin manufactured by Hoffman-La Roche. The pharmaceutical company distributes its trademarked SalmoFan, similar to paint store swatches, so fish farmers can choose among various shades.

Europeans are suspicious of canthaxanthin, which was linked to retinal damage in people when taken as a sunless tanning pill. The British banned its use as a tanning agent, but it's still available in the United States.

As for its use in animal feed, the European Commission scientific committee on animal nutrition issued a warning about the pigment and urged the industry to find an alternative. But in response, the British Food Standards Agency took the position that normal consumption of salmon poses no health risk. No government has banned the pigment from animal feed.

Scientists in the United States are far more concerned about a pair of preliminary studies -- one in British Columbia and one in Great Britain -- that showed farmed salmon accumulate more cancer-causing PCBs and toxic dioxins than wild salmon.

Scientists in the U.S. are trying to determine the extent of the contamination in salmon and what levels are safe for human consumption.

The culprit appears to be the salmon feed, which contains higher concentrations of fish oil -- extracted from sardines, anchovies and other ground-up fish -- than wild salmon normally consume. Man-made contaminants, PCBs and dioxins make their way into the ocean and are absorbed by marine life.

The pollutants accumulate in fat that is distilled into the concentrated fish oil, which, in turn, is a prime ingredient of the salmon feed.

Farmed salmon are far fattier than their wild cousins, although they do not contain as much of the beneficial omega-3 fatty acids.

The industry complains that environmental activists have misinterpreted the contaminant studies, needlessly frightening consumers.

"The concern is that people will stop eating fish," said Walling, of the British Columbia Salmon Farmers Assn. "Salmon is a healthy food choice. Our Canadian government says this is a safe food."

Environmentalists in British Columbia and Scotland recently launched campaigns urging consumers to boycott farmed salmon until the industry changes many of its practices.

At the least, they want the farms to switch to solid-walled pens with catch basins to isolate farmed fish -- and their diseases, pests and waste -- from the environment. The ideal solution, they say, is to have the farmed stock raised in landlocked tanks.

Protests notwithstanding, the industry is expected to get a lot bigger. Demand for seafood is rising and will double by 2040, according to the U.N.'s Food and Agriculture Organization. Nearly half the world's wild fisheries are exhausted from overfishing, thus much of the supply will likely come from farmed seafood.

"Aquaculture is here to stay," said Rebecca Goldburg, a biologist who co-authored a report on the industry for the Pew Oceans Commission. "The challenge is to ensure that this young industry grows in a sustainable manner and does not cause serious ecological damage."

*

Big sobby tears for the commericals. I read this with interest as pretty much every commerical fisherman in AK blames farming on the collapse of their industry. Not surprising for an ADN article at all.

I agree with Rich, it's going by the wayside and quite frankly, they've done a lot by glutting the market themselves.

I agree that fish farms are far from perfect, but I think the pro's outweigh the cons.

It peaked my interest as they mentioned that a Cook Inlet processor was involved. Here's a link to the state's number for the commerical fishery in Cook Inlet:

http://csfish.adfg.state.ak.us/Mariner/UCICATCHXAREAmp.php

See those 6,900 kings taken from the Kasilof section? I guarantee you that the catch is likely double that. It's a well known fact amongst area locals that the majority of kings get given away or are used for personal use. In addition, the dropout rate of them in the nets is very high. So let's be conservative and make that number 10,000 kings ... but it's probably substantially more.

Those 10,000 kings come off the mouth of a river that has no Biological Escapement Goal and absolutely no data whatsoever regarding run strength of a magnificent run of kings.

In addition, the headwaters of this river have been planted with sockeye to increase the number of sockeye returning to the river and thus increasing the amount of netting days WITHOUT ANY REGARD for the netting's impact on a wild run of kings.

I don't have much sympathy, sorry. And you thought only Washington State was screwed up in their management!!

I agree fish farming sounds good in the short term, and will help wild runs. I do have one worry, just like CDW in deer, and elk if man can find a way to screw up a species we will find it! Hate to find some disease that starts in one of those pens, that gets into the wild fish.

chumster

Chunster,

Fish farms are definately no more of a risk than hatcheries....

Years ago, I was also opposed to Private fish farming. One of the main reasons why I was so opposed was because the guy that was doing it was getting a "free ride" from the state at the cost of our limited natural resources.

By that, I mean that the fish farmer was being allowed to use large amounts of water from the "Tilton River" (free) to run his private fish farm. That same water was being highly degraded, and then being dumped right back into the "Tilton River". He was "supposedly" to mitigate for this "free use" and degrading of our "public waters" by building a "mitigation channel" that was supposed to provide protection plus additional over wintering "habitat" for juvenile fish. He also was "permitted" to build a "low head dam" (about 3 feet above the summer time low height) all the way across the Tilton River. The low head dam was to assure that his hatchery intake would always stable and that he would be assured that he would have plenty of fresh clean water available for his farm and that the river would not be able to change its channel and leave him dry (can you believe that?). After years of fighting the Friends of the Cowlitz and their objections, the fish farmer was allowed to complete his project by the WDFW and WDOE.

Because of the stink that the farmer's attorneys had put, both WDOE and WDFW caved in, and he was finally allowed to construct his proposed low head dam and mitigated "poop channel". The Farmer was finally forced to construct a fish ladder that had to be approved by both NMFS and WDFW. Originally, he had only intended to use his own "unauthorized design" custom made design (like how cheap can I make it!) to pass fish upstream.

The "Big joke" about his "side channel" mitigation; was that it was also his "poop and discharge channel" from his 12 rearing and 2 settling ponds. There was (and still is) no question in my mind (and even a few other WDFW and NMFS staff) that the farmer had bought off someone really big at that time (1992) in WDFW. In fact, WDFW's own records strongly indicate and suggested the same!

I do believe that fish farming is going to put the "commercials boys" out of business in the very near future, and that will be a "good thing" for both the natural spawning fish and yes, those dreaded mixed hatchery stocks too! My personal experience of dealing with fish farmers and fish farms has taught me plenty about fish farming and the many "short falls" that may come by doing it. But between the two (commercial netters or fish farmers) I will take the fish farmers!

Here's one more for you; many of you don't even know or realize that there are cureently no less then 2 active "Atlantic Salmon" fish farms that are currently operating on tributaries draining into the Cowlitz. One is about 10 years old and is located on a small little stream called "Cinerbar Cr", and the other is about 8 years old and is located on a major tributary to the Cowlitz, and is called the "Tilton River".

As far as I know, "Atlantic Salmon smolts" have been escaping from these facilities and have been captured every single year since 1992 at the smolts collection faculties which is located at the Mayfield Dam. In 1992, the numbers of "Atlantic Salmon smolts" were about 8 smolts a year then. The last time I was able to see any of WDFW trapping records at Mayfield Dam, (about 4 years ago) over 300 Atlantic smolts were then being caught yearly. How many of those smolts are not being captured and pass thought the Mayfield "fish friendly" turbines is anyone's guest!

To date WDFW has done nothing that I am aware of to locate or "STOP" the source of where these Atlantic's are coming from. Even the most "dumbest WDFW employee around" could have figure out where they were coming from…you would have thought!

What long term damages will be done by these escaped exotic fish and their disease problems that "this fish farm" and his "mitigated poop channel" is not yet known, but as others have already stated, there is plenty to be concerned about when it comes to any "exotic" that escapes into the wild.

So fish farming can be, and is, both good and bad, depending on where they are located, and what damages they may be doing to our "natural stocks" of fish if they are continued to be allowed to escape. Don't be too surprised if someday in the very near future you catch a "funny looking" Chinook on the Cowlitz or Mayfield lake someday soon!

FYI
I think I saw someone say something about sea Lice above, but here is an article where it talks about the destruction of the North Vancouver Island Pinks.

http://ens-news.com/ens/nov2002/2002-11-25-01.asp

The Pink run went from 3.615 million to just 147,000 in a few years. Hope the link works.

Imagine a fish farm off Cake Rock or any other coastal river. Would you be happy to see runs in the Quinalt or Columbia do that?

Good link NEN ... "Fish Farming" though doesn't always have to be net pens.

Even though Alaska bans "Fish Farming", saltwater hatcheries to create huge harvests in certain areas, expecially parts of Prince William Sound and SE are fairly common.

To me, this is still "Fish Farming" and may be the route to go w/o having some of the problems associated with pens. This would much like the Poggie clubs and their plants within the sound, for example at Edmonds Pier.

Does anyone know of any studies of impacts of these type of operations?

Bob,
If you can get the opportunity to read the book "NET LOSS" (The Salmon Netcage Industry in British Columbia) please do so. It should give you many of the answers that you may be looking for. The book (or Report) was published by David W. Ellis and Associates With Recommendations by David Suzuki Foundation that was published in 1996. It is a report of some 196 pages about net pens and the many problems that go along with them.

I Hope that this will help you out.

Bob,
Your right about net pens not being the only option.
I do not have any hard studies in front of me, maybe Smala or Salmo would. From what I understand plants directly into salt water, and net pens, in the sound are being discouraged due to the amount of straying when the fish eventually find a river to spawn in.

I worked for Prince William Sound Aquaculture for a summer, and did not think about that as "fish farming", but I do see your point. Some things that scare me with hatcheries like those, that get millions of pinks and chums back, are what are the impacts of that many additional salmon at sea, could it starve out the wild fish. I do not know enough about the amounts of food out there, I'm sure it is great but thats an awful lot of fry to feed when they are released. Production levals of fry from some of the PWS hatcheries is 50 to 200 million fry each.

N.E.N

Thanks for the heads-up CF

NEN, food source at sea surely would be a concern, but I would have to imagine given the depressed status of stocks all over the place, including parts of AK ... that the numbers of fish at sea even with these hatcheries can't be any higher than what Ma Nature intended to be there in the first place

There was a large article today in the Tacoma News Tribune about fish farms. Not once, but in two different sections. Talked about local businesses that are boycotting farm raised salmon in support of the Canadian boycott. The head chef at Anthony's in Tacoma swears that farm raised fish is not near as tasty as wild fish. He claimed several times in the interview that they only serve WILD salmon. Hmmmmmm.....

Personally, I think the way most restaurants prepare salmon you couldn't tell if it was farm-raised, hatchery, or wild. Some of you may disagree, but then my taste buds are calibrated more for a combination of malt, hops, and yeast.

Couple more thoughts here......

First, Roderick Haig-Brown imported and released Atlantic salmon for many years in the Campbell River to try to establish a self-sustaining run - and these efforts totally failed. This was only one of many experiments early in the last century conducted to try to figure out how to expand the range and angling opportunities for this king of sport fish, but it is probably the best known and is pertinent as that side of Vancouver Island is were most Atlantics are raised today. All of these million or so fish that have escaped over the years have had no better luck in establishing runs, and it is pretty unlikely that this will ever happen, as these fish appear to be unsutited for life in the Pacific wilds. Whether it is low disease resistance, inability to compete with wild salmon, or some other reason, Atlantic salmon just don't grow here.

Spawnout

Good informative post….But

Do you really think that the average everyday fisherman is able to identify or tell the difference between a "Atlantic" and a Chinook?

Maybe someone, if not you, can post some "real pictures" of both an Atlantic and a Chinook (not the one that is used in the rule book) to show the board just how much they really do look alike.

It's pretty darn hard for most fishermen to identify them apart!

I have to wonder how the commercial duck hunters spread their propaganda around when we shut down commercial duck hunters, that would be interesting ! Just about as good as the commercial buffulo hunters were squaking about those darn longhorn thingys out there grazing all the grass.
Remember nothing changes and remains the same...These guys are only going to go kicking and screaming, as far as i am concerned if i were a commercial fisherman i would start my own fish farming operation, that is the only way that they will be able to stay in the fish business.....
As for Anthony's restaurant not selling anything but wild salmon, i wonder if all those people realize that they are eating an endangered species.
If they don't quit the fishing business of their own volition then let them starve, they've never done a %^&* thing for me.

CFM, Atlantics look noting like pacific salmon, as they have a hooked lowerjaw like a steelhead, not a kype to the nose like the other pacific salmon. Besides, their mouth is white, so they would never be mixed up with a blackmouth. They aren't even related to salmon, they are most closely related to brown trout.

Anyway, here is a cool URL of salmon spawning that has Atlantics in the act, along with 4 species of Pacific salmon, and it also has comparative videos of all 5 Pacific salmon species, Atlantic salmon and brown trout, and even bull trout and brook trout. And I just gave away where I got my avatar

http://students.washington.edu/manu19b/UWspawnings.html

I doubt if Haig-Brown, himself, was directly involved in the stocking of Atlantic salmon in Vancouver Island rivers. He was, after all, not a wealthy man (he was a writer fer chrissake) and any such undertaking would have been almost impossible for a private individual in those days. The only reference that I can find in that regard is from The Western Angler -

"Annual plantings were made in the Cowichan, and occasional plantings in other Vancouver Island streams, for a sufficient number of years to give the experiment a good chance of success, but there have not been more than two or three properly authenticated returns."
The Western Angler - 1939

He did, at least at that time, feel that the establishment of Atlantic salmon in BC waters was a good idea and that it would probably not have a detrimental effect on native species. But that was then and this is now. I can't see how anyone could look at the disastrous consequences of salmon farming in Scotland and Norway in terms of pollution and disease without being extremely concerned about the galloping growth of salmon farming in the Northwest.