Wednesday July 9, 2025
SeaWestNews —
A group of leading fish health experts is calling on the federal government to base its aquaculture policy on transparent science, not ideological posturing, after their study dismantled Ottawa’s case for eliminating marine salmon farms in British Columbia.
They warn that the government is ignoring decades of evidence showing minimal impact from salmon farms on wild stocks, while pushing ahead with policies that threaten Indigenous rights, coastal jobs, and the stability of B.C.’s aquaculture-dependent communities.
The peer-reviewed landmark paper, published today in Aquaculture, Fish and Fisheries, analyses more than 20 years of scientific data and concludes that marine net pen salmon farms in B.C. have no more than minimal impact on wild salmon populations.
Co-authored by six senior fish health experts from the Pacific Coast, including Alaska, Washington, Oregon and California, the study directly rebuts recent activist-driven federal policies that have used selective science to justify phasing out ocean-based salmon aquaculture in B.C.
The new study concludes that removing open net pen salmon farms will have no measurable effect on the productivity of wild Pacific salmon populations, largely because there is no solid evidence linking farm-origin pathogens to significant population declines.
This minimal impact is further supported by more than two decades of robust, precautionary regulations in B.C., which include mandatory health management plans, detailed disease and mortality reporting and regular independent audits.
Dr. Gary Marty, the study’s lead author, said the confusion around salmon farming often stems from conflating risk with actual impact. He explained that while the presence of disease and pathogen transfer between farmed and wild fish is natural and expected, this doesn’t mean it leads to population-level harm.
The problem, he said, is that some studies that highlight theoretical risks without showing real-world consequences have been fuelling alarmism without solid evidence.
“We critique these (theoretical risks) interpretations, showing that in British Columbia, we have no good evidence that risks from salmon farm pathogens have resulted in long-term impacts on wild salmon populations,” said Dr Marty, a veteran fish pathologist who spent two decades with the Animal Health Centre of B.C.’s Ministry of Agriculture.
Co-author, Dr. Theodore Meyers, the lead fish pathologist for the Alaska Department of Fish and Game concurred saying: “future prohibition of the salmon farming industry in BC, Canada, based on disease transfer concerns when there already is adequate fish health oversight, seems unnecessary.”
The new paper aligns with earlier findings from the Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat (CSAS), which, in 10 peer-reviewed government reports, also found that B.C. salmon farms pose minimal risk to wild stocks.
It also echoes calls from the Canadian Veterinary Medical Association (CVMA), which has urged Ottawa to halt its transition plan until science — not political expediency — drives decision-making. “This ban threatens science-based policymaking across all animal sectors,” CVMA President Dr. Timothy Arthur said.
In its previous response to SeaWestNews, the Department of Fisheries and Oceans admitted it lacks data proving wild salmon populations recover when net pen farms are shut down.
Currently, ocean-raised salmon generate over $1.17 billion for the B.C. economy, supports 4,560 well-paid full-time jobs, and remains the province’s top agri-food export. That represents nearly half of what the sector produced before the Trudeau government aligned itself with anti-fish farming activists to announce a plan to ban open-net fish farms in B.C. by 2029.
An industry economic analysis warns that a full open-net ban would unleash widespread economic devastation, leaving taxpayers potentially liable for $9 billion in compensation to fish farmers, suppliers, and Indigenous communities with signed benefit agreements.
Ken Coates, director of Indigenous Affairs at the Macdonald-Laurier Institute, said the decision to effectively kill the salmon farming industry in B.C. was made without serious scientific input and reflects political pressure from activist groups.
He is calling on the new Mark Carney Liberal Government to hold an independent review of the science behind salmon farming policy, warning that continued disregard for evidence threatens to unravel years of Indigenous economic progress and erode public trust in government decision-making.
Key findings of the new study that challenge government and activist narratives:
- The new study refutes claims from a 2007 Science paper, promoted by activists, that predicted a 99% collapse of wild pink salmon in the Broughton Archipelago due to sea lice. In reality, four generations later, adult pink salmon returns hit record highs, which is the strongest ever recorded since the 1950s.
- On bacterial pathogens like Tenacibaculum maritimum, the researchers found that estimates of massive mortality in Fraser River sockeye were based only on genetic test results (PCR) with no evidence of actual infection, lesions, or disease. Three fish out of 2,280 tested had reliable PCR positives which is not a dataset that should drive national policy, said the researchers.
- The paper also highlights a misrepresentation in a recent Science Advances review that claimed PRV (piscine orthoreovirus) in B.C. causes severe cardiac lesions. “The study it cited actually reported only mild lesions,” the authors’ state.
- The new report provides data showing that wild salmon populations (such as Fraser River sockeye, Clayoquot Sound Chinook, and Broughton Archipelago pink salmon) have remained stable or increased in areas with active salmon farming, indicating minimal cumulative impact from farmed salmon pathogens.
- The study highlights how earlier reviews, pushed on social media by activists, misrepresented findings, omitted contradictory evidence, and in some cases misreported data from their own references, raising serious concerns about the objectivity and independence of those assessments.