The Series: Blog
The Sockeye Mystery: Unsolved
Let's admit it: we have no idea why the Fraser River sockeye salmon are so plentiful this year.
Remember last year? How the sockeye came in at less than 10% of their predicted run? What a difference one year can make, both to the sockeye... and to our memories.
Last year we thought we'd gotten people's attention. We thought we'd finally had a local and symbolic fish species that represented the direction many of the world's commercial fish stocks are headed (i.e., down the tubes). Fraser River sockeye numbers in BC were crashing. Fights were breaking out on the water. The Marine Stewardship Council was being hammered. Even Harper got all a twitter, and called a federal inquiry into the disappearance of sockeye.
People's bellies rumbled and hands got sweaty as the thought of tough times without sockeye clouded the minds of British Columbians across the province.
It appeared, at that time, that we gave a carp about an invaluable species on our coast.
So then what happened?
Ask the experts, and they'll likely give you different answers, depending on their backgrounds (also be warned of confusing opinions). So are they all wrong? Well, they're probably all a bit right, as it's likely a combination of many variables that have caused the 2010 sockeye surge.
A friend of mine asked me the other day at a dinner party why the sockeye run was so good this year following last year's miserable returns. I told him the most honest answer I knew: I didn't know.
Predictably, my friend was not satisfied with this answer. In fact, my ignorance kind of infuriated him: "I've asked every one I know, and no one can tell me!" he began, and, getting more and more worked up, finally bellowed across the room: "Three years on a degree in fisheries science and you still can't give me a simple answer??"
Embarrassing.
But true.
Or maybe a better word would be 'humbling'.
And true.
As cringing as that moment was, my friend had managed to get at the heart of the problem with fisheries science, and hence, management: we just don't know... a lot. There is so much uncertainty and variability in this science, in stock assessments, in models, in predictions; listen to Dr. Daniel Pauly's take on this in an interview with CBC.
Thanks to the Fraser River sockeye for giving us a dose of some much needed humility, and reminding us just how much we don't know.
blog comments powered by Disqus Remember last year? How the sockeye came in at less than 10% of their predicted run? What a difference one year can make, both to the sockeye... and to our memories.
Last year we thought we'd gotten people's attention. We thought we'd finally had a local and symbolic fish species that represented the direction many of the world's commercial fish stocks are headed (i.e., down the tubes). Fraser River sockeye numbers in BC were crashing. Fights were breaking out on the water. The Marine Stewardship Council was being hammered. Even Harper got all a twitter, and called a federal inquiry into the disappearance of sockeye.
People's bellies rumbled and hands got sweaty as the thought of tough times without sockeye clouded the minds of British Columbians across the province.
It appeared, at that time, that we gave a carp about an invaluable species on our coast.
So then what happened?
Ask the experts, and they'll likely give you different answers, depending on their backgrounds (also be warned of confusing opinions). So are they all wrong? Well, they're probably all a bit right, as it's likely a combination of many variables that have caused the 2010 sockeye surge.
A friend of mine asked me the other day at a dinner party why the sockeye run was so good this year following last year's miserable returns. I told him the most honest answer I knew: I didn't know.
Predictably, my friend was not satisfied with this answer. In fact, my ignorance kind of infuriated him: "I've asked every one I know, and no one can tell me!" he began, and, getting more and more worked up, finally bellowed across the room: "Three years on a degree in fisheries science and you still can't give me a simple answer??"
Embarrassing.
But true.
Or maybe a better word would be 'humbling'.
And true.
As cringing as that moment was, my friend had managed to get at the heart of the problem with fisheries science, and hence, management: we just don't know... a lot. There is so much uncertainty and variability in this science, in stock assessments, in models, in predictions; listen to Dr. Daniel Pauly's take on this in an interview with CBC.
Thanks to the Fraser River sockeye for giving us a dose of some much needed humility, and reminding us just how much we don't know.
