CP32-93-2012-3-eng.pdf
CP32-93-2012-3-eng.pdf
CP32-93-2012-3-eng.pdf
Create successful ePaper yourself
Turn your PDF publications into a flip-book with our unique Google optimized e-Paper software.
Cohen Commission of Inquiry into the Decline of Sockeye Salmon in the Fraser River • Volume 3<br />
monitoring programs, including data that<br />
relate to farmed or wild salmon.<br />
Minimizing risks and uncertainty<br />
As discussed in Volume 2, Chapter 5, Findings,<br />
salmon farming is an activity that poses some<br />
risk to Fraser River sockeye, though the extent<br />
of that risk is far from certain. The precautionary<br />
principle addresses situations involving risk and<br />
scientific uncertainty. As discussed in Volume 1,<br />
chapters 3, Legal framework, and 4, DFO overview,<br />
the precautionary principle – expressed in international<br />
agreements to which Canada is a party<br />
(such as the Convention on Biological Diversity),<br />
domestic legislation (such as the Oceans Act or the<br />
Species at Risk Act), and various DFO policies –<br />
guides my consideration of the management and<br />
conservation of Fraser River sockeye. The essence<br />
of the precautionary principle is that, where a risk<br />
of serious or irreversible harm exists, a lack of<br />
scientific certainty should not be used as a reason<br />
for postponing or failing to take reasonable and<br />
cost-effective conservation and management<br />
measures to address that risk. The precautionary<br />
principle does not mandate specific conservation<br />
and management actions to be taken once the<br />
principle is <strong>eng</strong>aged. Canada’s approach to the<br />
application of precaution is “flexible and responsive”<br />
to various situations. 49 One witness referred<br />
to the precautionary principle as an “elegant<br />
connection between risk-based management and<br />
adaptive management.” 50<br />
Over the course of 128 days of hearings,<br />
10 public forums, and numerous submissions<br />
from the public and formal participants in the<br />
Inquiry, I have formed the view that Fraser<br />
River sockeye are extremely important to British<br />
Columbians. They generally expect a high level<br />
of protection for this iconic species. However,<br />
this expectation does not mean that British<br />
Columbians accept no risk to this species.<br />
Virtually all development along the Fraser River<br />
sockeye migratory route (e.g., logging, agriculture,<br />
urban development, pulp mills) poses some<br />
risk to Fraser River sockeye. British Columbians<br />
may well accept some risk of serious harm in<br />
return for benefits such as the employment arising<br />
from salmon farms. However, based on the<br />
evidence and submissions I heard, I am satisfied<br />
that British Columbians will not tolerate more<br />
than a minimal risk of serious harm to Fraser<br />
River sockeye from salmon farming.<br />
In using the precautionary principle to guide<br />
my consideration of the appropriate response<br />
to the risks that salmon farms pose to the future<br />
sustainability of Fraser River sockeye, I have asked<br />
myself four questions:<br />
• What is the likelihood of harm occurring<br />
• Is the potential harm serious or irreversible<br />
• Do current management measures ensure<br />
that the risk of serious or irreversible harm<br />
is minimal<br />
• Could further reasonable and cost-effective<br />
measures be employed to reduce the risk and/<br />
or the scientific uncertainty<br />
I discuss each of these questions in the sections<br />
below, and then make recommendations for<br />
minimizing the risk and uncertainty around salmon<br />
farms and their effects on Fraser River sockeye.<br />
What is the likelihood of harm occurring<br />
In Volume 2, Chapter 4, Decline-related evidence,<br />
I set out the evidence relating to whether salmon<br />
farms have contributed to the decline of Fraser<br />
River sockeye and whether they pose future risks<br />
to Fraser River sockeye. The evidence suggests<br />
that waste and chemical discharges from salmon<br />
farms are unlikely to have any effects on Fraser<br />
River sockeye at the population level. I reached the<br />
same conclusion about Atlantic salmon escapes<br />
from fish farms. However, researchers testifying<br />
before me did not agree on whether diseases and<br />
pathogens from fish farms may have contributed<br />
to the decline or may pose risks of significant harm<br />
to Fraser River sockeye. I accept the evidence that<br />
the state of scientific research about sockeye–fish<br />
farm interactions is not sufficiently developed to<br />
rule out diseases on salmon farms as contributing<br />
to the decline of Fraser River sockeye and posing<br />
future risks.<br />
Of all the expert witnesses I heard from on the<br />
topics of salmon farms or diseases, no one told me<br />
there is no likelihood of harm occurring to Fraser<br />
River sockeye from diseases and pathogens on fish<br />
farms. Some said the risk could never be zero, and<br />
20