Symbol of the Government of Canada

Archived - Aquaculture in Canada

Archived Content

Information identified as archived on the Web is for reference, research or recordkeeping purposes. It has not been altered or updated after the date of archiving. Web pages that are archived on the Web are not subject to the Government of Canada Web Standards. As per the Communications Policy of the Government of Canada, you can request alternate formats on the "Contact Us" page.

 

Table of Contents

Canadian Aquaculture

Production and Value

Species Diversity

Aquaculture Trade

Consumption

Economic Impact

Fish Escapes

Innovation-Driven Environmental Management

Provincial Departments Responsible for Aquaculture

References


The following document is also available for downloading or viewing:

Aquaculture Canada (PDF Version, 4.8mb)


“Aquaculture is an increasingly important part of the Canadian economy, providing valuable employment opportunities in coastal and rural communities, and contributing to the world’s food supply. Aquaculture production in Canada has more than doubled since 1996, and its value has almost tripled to close to $1 billion a year. Canada’s aquaculture industry has tremendous potential.

To that end, the Government of Canada has committed $70 million over the next five years to build our aquaculture industry to make it more successful and competitive.  This funding will help improve our regulatory process through greater coordination between levels of government. It will enhance regulatory science to establish performance-based environmental standards for aquaculture operations. And, it will drive innovation and certification to strengthen aquaculture’s competitiveness and productivity.

This publication is a showcase of the Canadian aquaculture industry.  It provides key information pertaining to this sector and features scientific and technological innovations that have led to tangible improvements in the industry’s environmental performance.

I am very proud that Canada produces some of the best-tasting and safest farmed fish and seafood products on the market today. But to be successful in the long term, aquaculture must be — and must be seen to be — environmentally and economically sustainable and of high quality.”

The Honourable Gail Shea
Minister of Fisheries and Oceans 

CANADIAN AQUACULTURE

The Canadian aquaculture industry produces high quality food products. It farms a variety of finfish and shellfish in marine and freshwater environments.  Aquaculture is responding to a growing global demand for fresh, nutritious and affordable seafood where population levels of some wild stocks have reached a plateau or declined.

Most of Canada’s aquaculture production occurs in a range of marine environments on the east coast and west coast. Of the total production volume, approximately 90% is produced by marine and 10% by freshwater aquaculture; although small in scale, freshwater aquaculture takes place in each province.

The industry employs state-of-the-art technologies and undergoes stringent regulatory processes to ensure food safety and environmental performance. With solid science support from Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), the industry is constantly engaged in enhancing productivity, competitiveness, and sustainability.

Canada ranked 16th in world aquaculture, in terms of value, in 2006. Domestically, it increased its share of total Canadian seafood in 2006. The value of aquaculture products accounted for one-third of the total Canadian seafood value (wild and culture combined), as compared to one-quarter in 2005 (Figure 1). Higher value of aquaculture products contributed to this rise.

Figure 1 - Share of aquaculture of total Canadian seafood value

Figure 1 - Share of aquaculture of total Canadian seafood value - 2005: Aquaculture, 26%; Fisheries, 74%. 2006: Aquaculture, 33%; Fisheries, 67%.
Source: DFO

PRODUCTION AND VALUE

Canadian aquaculture continues to grow. In 2006, total production reached 181,495 tonnes, 17% higher than 2005.  Nearly half of the production was contributed by British Columbia accounting for an all-time high farmgate value of $961 million, representing a 34% increase.  Both volume and value exceeded the level of 2002 when production peaked.

Finfish accounted for most of this gain. Finfish production increased by 22% to 142,815 tonnes accounting for over 78% of total production (Table 1). At the same time, over 92% of the total value, worth $890 million, came from the sales of finfish (Table 2). Finfish include salmon, trout and a few other marine and freshwater species. Finfish aquaculture is found in all provinces with a concentration of salmon farms in British Columbia and New Brunswick, and of trout farms in central Canada.

Shellfish production and value recorded a negligible increase. Severe winter storms in British Columbia in 2006 resulted in significant losses of shellfish infrastructure and stocks. The production increased to 38,680 tonnes, from 38,611 tonnes in 2005, with a corresponding farmgate value of $70.5 million. Shellfish include mussels, oysters, clams, scallops, and other species and production is concentrated on the east coast. The four provinces on the east coast—Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick—produced 75% of total shellfish production, with the rest being unevenly distributed between British Columbia (24.2%) and Quebec (0.8%).

Table 1 - Aquaculture production (tonnes) by species

 

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finfish

 

 

 

 

 

Salmon

126,321

99,961

90,646

98,369

125,880

Trout

7,601

5,988

5,680

5,697

7,128

Other finfish

3,601

8,502

7,491

12,621

9,807

Total finfish

137,523

114,451

103,817

116,687

142,815

Shellfish

 

 

 

 

 

Clams

1,500

1,589

1,599

1,831

1,600

Oysters

11,520

13,621

13,228

12,957

12,488

Mussels

20,615

20,590

22,863

22,930

23,826

Scallops

67

95

87

61

58

Other shellfish

578

594

808

832

708

Total shellfish

34,280

36,489

38,585

38,611

38,680

Total aquaculture

171,803

150,940

142,402

155,298

181,495

 

 

 

 

 

 


Source: DFO

Table 2 - Aquaculture value (thousand $) by species

 

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

Finfish

 

 

 

 

 

Salmon

502,036

441,471

400,180

543,337

789,089

Trout

40,653

33,413

30,512

29597

34,882

Other finfish

28,830

51,257

46,251

74,842

66,334

Total finfish

571,519

526,141

476,943

647,776

890,305

Shellfish

 

 

 

 

 

Clams

7,100

7,903

7,371

8,600

8,300

Oysters

15,176

19,208

16,740

16,536

18,522

Mussels

31,449

30,929

32,807

33,582

35,739

Scallops

464

687

656

460

461

Other shellfish

2,590

6,116

6,833

8,220

7,557

Total shellfish

56,779

64,843

64,407

67,398

70,579

Total aquaculture

628,298

590,984

541,350

715,174

960,884

 

 

 

 

 

 


Source: DFO

 

Salmon

Salmon set the production trend, accounting for 70% of the total aquaculture production and 81% of the value (Figure 2). In 2006, salmon production increased 28% to 125,880 tonnes (Table 1). The corresponding farmgate value had a massive increase of 45% to $789 million (Table 2). The increase was led by the production of Atlantic salmon and its higher market prices. The share of pacific salmon—Coho and Chinook—is small (about 15%) and has fallen steadily over the past decade.

Figure 2 - Aquaculture productin and value by species, 2006

Figure 2 - Aquaculture productin and value by species, 2006.  PRODUCTION: Salmon, 70%; Trout, 4%; Other finfish, 5%; Mussels, 13%; Oysters, 7%; Clams, scallops and other shellfish, 1%. VALUE: Salmon, 81%; Trout, 4%; Other finfish, 7%; Mussels, 4%; Oysters, 2%; Clams, scallops and other shellfish, 2%.

Source: DFO

Farmed salmon’s share of total Canadian aquaculture increased again in 2006 (Figure 3). The increase was greater for value than production volume. Higher world salmon prices in 2006 driven by limited supply growth had a beneficial impact on the Canadian salmon industry, leading to an increase in the farmgate price (Table 3).

Figure 3 - Salmon's share of Canadian Aquaculture. Source: DFO

Figure 3 - Salmon's share of Canadian Aquaculture. Source: DFO. Production: 2002, 73.50%; 2003, 66.20%; 2004, 63.70%; 2005, 63.30%; 2006, 69.00%. Value: 2002, 79.90% 2003, 74.70%; 2004, 73.90%; 2005, 76.00%; 2006, 81.30%.

Most salmon production took place in British Columbia (59%), followed by New Brunswick. Newfoundland and Labrador, and Nova Scotia also had some contributions to total salmon production.

Trout and other finfish

In 2006, trout production increased to 7,128 tonnes, valued at $34.8 million at the farmgate (Tables 1 & 2). The trout industry is concentrated in rainbow trout, but also raises brook trout. About 60% of the trout production was contributed by Ontario (Figure 4)—most of which were rainbow trout raised by cage culture. The second major share was held by Quebec (19%), where the industry raises mostly brook trout for re-stocking in private recreational fisheries. Other provinces together contributed the remaining 21% of the production—the bulk of which was produced in Saskatchewan followed by Alberta.

A number of marine and freshwater finfish, lumped together as “other finfish”, accounted for a significant proportion (5%) of total finfish production (Table 1). A small number of producers specialize in these species, as markets for these products are undeveloped or production techniques at higher volumes have not emerged.  Their combined production has fluctuated over time with no clear trend. In 2006, the production fell 27% to 9,171 tonnes from an all-time high of 12,621 tonnes in 2005.

Figure 4 - Trout production by province, 2002-2006. Source: DFO

Figure 4 - Trout production by province, 2002-2006. Source: DFO.  Ontario: 2002, 4,650; 2003, 4,200; 2004, 4,000; 2005, 4,075; 2006, 4,250;. Quebec: 2002, 768; 2003, 735; 2004, 858; 2005, 910;  2006, 1375;. Other provinces: 2002, 2183; 2003, 1,053; 2004, 8222; 2004, 712; 2004, 1,503

Mussels

Mussels are the second important farmed species in terms of production volume, though not in terms of value (Figure 2). Despite growing demand for mussels in the global market, its production growth has been slow. In 2006, the production was 23,826 tonnes, only 4% higher than 2005. The corresponding farmgate value, however, increased 6% to $35.7 million.

Prince Edward Island is famous for its blue mussels, the dominant species in Canadian shellfish aquaculture. Prince Edward Island contributed 72.3%, or 17,234 tonnes, of the mussel production, distantly followed by Newfoundland and Labrador (13.4%). Other contributing provinces included Quebec, British Columbia, Nova Scotia and New Brunswick.

Table 3   Average farmgate price for top farmed species ($/kg)

 

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

Salmon

4.0

4.4

4.4

5.5

6.3

Rainbow Trout

5.3

5.6

5.4

5.2

4.9

Mussels

1.5

1.5

1.4

1.5

1.5

Oysters

1.3

1.4

1.3

1.3

1.5

 

 

 

 

 

 

Oysters, clams, and other shellfish

Of the total oyster production, 83% was located in British Columbia (60%) and Prince Edward Island (23%). The remaining 17% was shared by Nova Scotia and New Brunswick. Production in 2006 fell 4% to 12,488 tonnes (Table 1). By contrast, the corresponding farmgate value had a significant increase of 12% to $18.5 million. The production decline was partly due to losses at oyster farms resulting from severe weather events in British Columbia and infection from a parasite called Multinucleate Sphere X, or MSX, in American oysters in Nova Scotia. Higher value on the other hand was realized due to higher unit price (Table 3).

Clam farming suffered similar losses as oysters. The clam industry took a smaller share of a much bigger pie and flourished only in British Columbia. Production was down 13% to 1,600 tonnes. Higher unit price (Table 4), however, helped the industry to prevent a large fall of farmgate value. The value fell only 3% to $8.3 million (Table 2). 

The production of all other shellfish species fell again in 2006 to 708 tonnes from a peak of 832 tonnes in 2005. The total value of these shellfish sales totaled $7.5 million.

SPECIES DIVERSITY

Production statistics do not identify many species farmed in Canada because their production is too small to report individually. Table 4 lists some of them, along with the dominant species, whose production has been combined under “other finfish” and “other shellfish” categories in Tables 1 and 2. Although these species are not yet commercially important, they hold great potential for diversifying Canadian aquaculture.

Table 4 - Different species farmed in Canada

  Finfish Shellfish Plants
Marine Freshwater

 

Commercial

 

Atlantic salmon
Coho salmon
Chinook salmon
Steelhead

 

Rainbow trout
Brook trout

 

Blue mussels
Oysters*
Clams*
Scallops*

 

Geoduck

 

 

Developmental

 

Atlantic cod
Atlantic halibut
Haddock
Atlantic wolfish
Eel
Sablefish

 

Tilapia
Sturgeon
Arctic charr
Walleye
Yellow perch
Grass carp
American Eel
Brown trout
Tiger trout

 

Quahog
Geoduck
Sea urchin
Sea cucumber
Soft shell clams
Bay scallops

 

Kelp
Seaweed*

Source: DFO
* Different species

AQUACULTURE TRADE

Aquaculture exports in 2006 increased again for the second consecutive year after a dip in 2004. The largest market for Canada’s aquaculture products is the United States with 93% of sales. Canada’s aquaculture exports have been consistently greater than imports and increased in 2006. Aquaculture imports accounted for less than 4% of aquaculture trade. Exports increased 9% to $562.5 million, whereas imports fell 23% to $21.8 million. Aquaculture trade balance increased 11% to $540.7 million (Table 5) despite exporters’ vulnerability due to stronger Canadian dollar with respect to the US dollar.

Table 5   Aquaculture trade balance (thousand $)

 

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

Export

641,654

489,010

421,759

514,559

562,581

Import

25,777

34,471

35,849

28,529

21,840

 

 

 

 

 

 

Balance

615,877

454,539

385,910

486,030

540,741

Source: DFO

Salmon accounted for 96% of the exports. Benefiting from higher price in the world market, the export value of salmon trended upward further in 2006 to $539 million (Figure 5). Over 93% of the salmon exports went to major American markets such as California, Massachusetts, Washington, and New York. The small non-US markets are dispersed among France, Japan, Taiwan and other countries. The rising share of these markets fell again after reaching a peak of 9% in 2005 (Table 6).

Figure 5 - Canada's aquaculture exports (million $). Source: Statistics Canada, 2007

Figure 5 - Canada's aquaculture exports (million $). Source: Statistics Canada, 2007.  Salmon: 2002, 619,613; 2003, 467,229; 2004, 401,011; 2005, 491,113; 2006, 539,469;. Mussels: 2002, 22,023;	2003, 21,781; 2004, 20,748;	2005, 23,446; 2006, 23,112.

Mussels are the second predominant aquaculture export species. The export value of mussels dropped slightly, 1.4%, to $23 million. This could have been an influence of its limited production growth. The United States is almost the exclusive destination for mussel exports. Less than 1% was exported to non-US markets. However, there was a marked increase in the share of non-US markets in 2006. The value for non-US markets reached $538 thousand in 2006 from a mere $21 thousand in 2005.

Table 6 - Canadian aquaculture exports in different markets - Source: Statistics Canada 2007

 

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

US markets

97%

97%

95%

91%

94%

Other markets

3%

3%

5%

9%

6%

Canadian exporters sell most of the salmon whole, fresh and frozen in the US market. This stands in contrast with its major competitor, Chile, which is increasing its share of value-added exports in the US. The share of the export value of Atlantic salmon fillets steadily declined over the years (Figure 6). Being in proximity to the US markets, Canadian exporters enjoy an advantage over competitors in exporting fresh and whole salmon.

Figure 6 - Export values of whole salmon and fillets. Source: DFO

Figure 6 - Export values of whole salmon and fillets. Source: DFO.  Atlantic salmon whole: 2002, 73%; 2003, 70%; 2004, 74%; 2005, 80%; 2006, 89%;.  Atlantic salmon fillets: 2002, 27%; 2003, 30%; 2004, 26%; 2005, 20%; 2006, 11%;.

CONSUMPTION

Aquaculture-specific domestic consumption data are not available. Data on Canadian fish consumption show that per capita consumption of fish, wild and farmed together, was 9.36 kilograms (edible weight) in 2006. It was relatively stable since reaching a high of 9.8 kilograms in 2003. Canadians preferred fresh and frozen fish to processed fish. They also consumed more shellfish than freshwater fish (Table 7).

Table 7 - Per capita seafood consumption in Canada (kg/person). Source: Statistics Canada, 2007 (a)

 

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fresh and frozens fish

4.01

4.43

3.94

4.04

4.09 (44%)

Freshwater fish

0.43

0.53

0.51

0.47

0.50 (5%)

Processed sea fish 2.96 2.81 2.74

2.90

2.87 (31%)
Shellfish 2.17 2.03 1.93 1.90 1.89 (20%)
Total

9.57

9.80 9.12 9.31 9.35

Environmental and food safety research organizations have included farmed trout, farmed mussels, and farmed clams in the list of the best seafood choice. Growing demand for seafood at foodservice establishments as well as changing demographic composition is expected to increase demand for farmed fish. Non-conventional retailers and mass marketing by supermarkets are also popularizing farmed fish to domestic consumers.

ECONOMIC IMPACT

Increased aquaculture production and exports resulted in economic benefits in 2006, as reflected in a record high gross valued-added contribution to the economy. The extent of economic and employment benefits would be higher if industry linkages with local and regional supplies of goods and services were taken into account. In addition, aquaculture makes significant contributions to community integration through creating income and employment opportunities for rural and coastal communities.

Figure 7 - Aquaculture valued-added. Source: Statistics Canada, 2007

Figure 7 - Aquaculture valued-added. Source: Statistics Canada, 2007.  Total operating revenue:2002, 754,350; 2003, 737,150; 2004, 678,150; 2005, 776,855; 2006, 968,663;. Total input costs: 2002, 536,745; 2003, 518,741; 2004, 531,920; 2005, 558,945; 2006, 585,899;. Gross value added: 2002, 249,900; 2003, 203,345; 2004, 209,709; 2005, 220,005; 2006, 395,787.

Aquaculture value-added

Gross value added refers to the value of the final output; it is derived by subtracting the value of product inputs (or purchases from other businesses) from the value of gross output. The gross value added by the industry to the economy reached $395.8 million, up 58% from 2005 (Figure 7). This amount excludes any contribution by the Prairie provinces - Manitoba, Saskatchewan, and Alberta. Not surprisingly, British Columbia took the largest share, 41%, of this contribution.

Input costs grew 5.6% in 2006 to $590.4 million. These consist of the cost of products and services purchased from other businesses, excluding capital and labour costs.

Feed costs, which account for over half of all product expenses for finfish producers, increased about 20% to $301.9 million, from $252.6 million in the previous year. Expenses on eggs and fish for grow-out on the other hand fell 33% to $33.6 million. The expenses on veterinary and other professional services also fell 32% to $7.4 million. The proportion of expenses on therapeutants has been stable over the last five years despite the fact that input costs and production increased by 6% and 10%, respectively, between 2002 and 2006.

Employment

Aquaculture has diversified employment. In the coastal regions, where seasonality contributes to unemployment, aquaculture has created a great opportunity for offsetting seasonality and offering year-round employment. The aquaculture industry is in the unique position of being able to offer a variety of challenging career choices for people who wish to work in remote, rural or coastal communities. Since aquaculture is a science and technology based industry, it requires highly specialized and skilled people such as laboratory technicians, research technicians, harvest supervisors, production and marketing supervisors, accountants, divers, and construction workers to name a few.

Figure 8 - Share of Aquaculture input costs. Source: Statistics Canada, 2007

Figure 8 - Share of Aquaculture input costs.  Source: Statistics Canada, 2007.  2005: Others 42%; Feed: 45%; Professional services: 2%; Eggs and fish: 9%; Therapeutants: 2%. 2006: Others 40%; Feed: 51%; Professional services: 1%; Eggs and fish: 6%; Therapeutants: 2%

Reliable annual aquaculture employment data are not available. One aquaculture employment survey, carried out in 2004, estimates that aquaculture employed 5,565 people. One-third of these employees earned a yearly income between $25,000 and $35,000 and received other benefits. The survey also found that 80% of the jobs were full-time and most of them were on finfish farms (especially salmon farms), which operate year round. Shellfish farming is characterized by seasonality and therefore employment on shellfish farms tend to be more part-time. The jobs were concentrated in rural British Columbia and New Brunswick, where farms are larger in size. 

This finding, however, does not fully capture many part-time jobs on small shellfish and trout farms that do not report family labour used on the farms. Table 8 shows the breakdown of the jobs by company size.

Table 8 - Aquaculture employment

Company size

Estimated no. of employees

0-4 employees

725

5-24 employees

1,200

15-49 employees

549

50-99 employees

412

100+ employees

2,679

Total

5,565

The direct jobs supported many indirect jobs in other aquaculture related businesses. Using an employment multiplier of 2.5, as reported in other aquaculture studies, the estimated total direct and indirect and induced jobs supported by the aquaculture industry would be 14,000.

The survey also found that half of all employees were in the young adult age category, between 21 and 35 years old. Female employees accounted for 28% and the First Nations employees 6% of total jobs.

FISH ESCAPES

The loss of fish is an important environmental concern due to its potential impact on wild fish. It is also a great concern of producers as escape represents a financial loss. DFO, provinces, and the industry are constantly engaged in achieving “zero escape” of fish from net pen or cage facilities. In most jurisdictions, farms are required to adopt measures to reduce the incidence and severity of escapes; actual and suspected escape reporting is a condition of aquaculture licence.

In 2006, the number of reported escapes from aquaculture facilities was negligible, continuing a trend since 2002 of fewer incidents of escapement and fewer numbers of fish escaping.  While escapes can still occur as a consequence of storms, equipment failure, predator damage, and human error, fewer fish are escaping from aquaculture facilities.

INNOVATION-DRIVEN ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

Science and innovation provides the basis of environmental management practices of Canadian aquaculture. DFO collaborates with provinces, academia, and industry in many different ways to enhance knowledge and improve aquaculture management practices. Below are a few examples of the collaboration.

Aquaculture Collaborative Research and Development Program (ACRDP)

ACRDP is a DFO-industry collaboration that aims to enhance industry competitiveness. It has been running since 2001 with a yearly funding of $4.5 million. The industry contributes 30% (cash-in-kind) of the ACRDP amount requested by a research project. By 2007, the program approved and funded over 230 projects across its three priority areas: best performance in fish production (54%), environmental performance (30%), and optimal fish health (16%).

In total, over $56 million in research has been conducted through the ACRDP.  This includes $25.7 million in ACRDP funds, $12.6 million from industry contributions, $12.7 million in other DFO funding and $5.0 million in contributions from other project partners (Figure 9).

Figure 9 - ACRDP and leveraged funding for aquaculture R&D. Source: DFO

Figure 9 - ACRDP and leveraged funding for aquaculture R&D. Source: DFO - In total, over $56 million in research has been conducted through the ACRDP. This includes $25.7 million in ACRDP funds, $12.6 million from industry contributions, $12.7 million in other DFO funding and $5.0 million in contributions from other project partners.

ACRDP success story –

“New Fish Feed Goes Green”

In 2007, the ACRDP completed a three-year multi-partner research pilot to study Canadian farmed trout fed with a high energy, low-phosphorous feed developed by the Danish aquaculture industry, and newly formulated high-performance feed developed by Canadian companies.

The study examined if the feed had a better feed conversion ratio and reduced phosphorus waste as compared to traditional domestic trout feeds used by Canadian fish growers. Small-scale feed trials were held under controlled laboratory conditions and at eight larger-scale commercial fish farms across Canada.

Farmed fish are fed small, nutrient-dense, dry pellets. Feed must meet the nutritional requirements of healthy growing fish. It is also the most significant cost in operating a fish farm.

Both the Danish and the newly formulated Canadian feeds performed beyond expectations. There was an overall reduction of phosphorous output by 36%. And while the new feeds are higher in price, the improved feed conversion ratio resulted in an overall reduced cost of feeding fish. The new feeds significantly improve fish growth and reduce the environmental footprint of the fish farm operation.

National Aquatic Animal Health Program (NAAHP)

NAAHP is a science-based regulatory and monitoring program co-delivered by DFO with Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA), provinces and industry. It is designed to meet international aquatic animal health management standards to protect Canadian aquatic resources (wild and farmed) from serious infectious diseases and to maintain competitive international market access. The program has a budget of $59 million over five years beginning from 2005 with permanent funding thereafter.

In 2007, DFO, CFIA and the governments of Quebec and Ontario undertook surveillance for Viral Hemorrahgic Septicemia (VHS) of freshwater fish in the Canadian portion of the Great Lakes and St. Lawrence River systems. The surveillance will provide the scientific basis for the development of joint VHS management strategies.

Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture

A great deal of emphasis is placed on responsible marine aquaculture practices worldwide. One concept that is currently being examined is Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture (IMTA). This is the idea of growing finfish, shellfish and marine plants together for the benefit of all crops and the environment. IMTA is a collaboration between DFO, academics, and industry and is engaged in testing the viability of combining fed aquaculture (e.g., finfish) with inorganic extractive (e.g., seaweed) and organic extractive (e.g., shellfish).  IMTA is an approach that uses the mussels and kelp to recycle the nutrients and can lead to "greener" aquaculture practices through the reduction in waste products in the marine environment and possible sedimentation on the ocean floor. The culture of various species could also lead to economic gains for fish farmers.  Many years of research has supported the idea that IMTA is environmentally sustainable, economically viable, and socially acceptable.

An inter-disciplinary team drawing from the University of New Brunswick at Saint John and DFO is now developing an IMTA system at an industrial pilot scale by co-cultivating Atlantic salmon, kelp, and blue mussel at several aquaculture sites in the Bay of Fundy. The industrial and government partners associated with the project are Cooke Aquaculture Inc., Acadian Seaplants Limited and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency.  A similar initiative is also underway in British Columbia.

Pink Salmon Action Plan

The Pink Salmon Action Plan has been in operation since 2003 to assess and protect the health of the wild pink salmon in the Broughton Archipelago, British Columbia. Sea lice are naturally occurring organisms that have co-existed with salmon and other species of fish on the Pacific coast long before aquaculture operations were present. However, concern was expressed that salmon farms in the Broughton area increased the level of sea lice that infested juvenile pink salmon. The monitoring program under the Action Plan indicates that sea lice levels at farm sites can be managed.  While sea lice may infect and cause mortality in some juvenile pink salmon, there is no evidence that sea lice is impacting the population of pink salmon in the area.

The Action Plan publishes bulletins showing the prevalence and intensity of sea lice on pink and chum salmon in the Broughton Archipelago.

Provincial and Territorial Departments Responsible for Aquaculture

Newfoundland and Labrador Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture

Prince Edward Island Department of Fisheries, Aquaculture and Rural Development

Nova Scotia Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture

New Brunswick Department of Agriculture and Aquaculture

New Brunswick Department of the Environment

Ministère de l’Agriculture, des Pêcheries et de l’Alimentation du Québec

Ontario Ministry of Natural Resources

Manitoba Water Stewardship, Fisheries Branch

Saskatchewan Department of Environment

Alberta Agriculture, Food and Rural Development

British Columbia Ministry of Agriculture and Lands—Fisheries and Aquaculture

Environment Yukon

References

Statistics Canada. (2007). Aquaculture Statistics 2006.
Statistics Canada. (2007a). Food Consumption Statistics 2006.
Mathews, R. (2004). The Canadian Aquaculture Employment Study. Prepared for the Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance.


Back to Top