|
For nearly
as long as canneries have been processing salmon, researchers have been
measuring, aging, and otherwise studying the complex journey of salmon
from egg to death.
What
they've learned is nothing short of astounding, but what remains unknown
is even more so. Portions of a salmon's journey, like ocean migration
and navigation, marine ecosystem dynamics, and the complete failure
of returning fish in some years, are scarcely understood at all.
Even more disconcerting is the potential effect of global
warming on wild salmon populations worldwide. Scientists know that a
natural 25-year cycle of periodic ocean cooling—Pacific Decadal
Oscillation—and heating greatly affects marine productivity. As
the ocean warms, productivity increases, meaning more food for salmon.
During
a cooling cycle, less food is available, resulting in a decrease in
salmon production. Harvest records throughout the Pacific Rim over the
last century support this fact. Too-warm water, however, appears to
inhibit normal nutrient circulation in the ocean, which each year brings
nitrogen, along with other essential plant nutrients, to the surface.
Throw into this mix a rising earth's temperature due to the effects
of human industrialization, and no one knows what will happen if the
North Pacific no longer cycles between warm and cool periods. Could
the Pacific eventually become too warm, shutting off forever this vast,
ancient conveyor belt of immense productivity? That's a possibility
no one throughout the Pacific Rim dares to contemplate.
Salmon
scientists face other challenges, one of them at the microscopic level.
Genetic diversity, that great potpourri of variability that allows a
species to quickly adapt to changing environmental conditions, may be
at risk. Each year hatcheries located in Kodiak, Cook Inlet, Prince
William Sound, and throughout southeast Alaska release about 1.6 billion
salmon into the ocean. Sometimes hatchery fish spawn with wild fish,
diluting the millennia-old genetic code of wild salmon. In addition
to genetic mixing, no one knows what effect hatchery salmon may have
on the oceanic food sources of wild salmon. Can the ocean support so
many salmon, particularly in poor production years?
Salmon biological diversity also may be threatened by fishery managers
themselves. Because Bristol Bay sockeye arrive all at once within the
span of a few weeks, harvesting them while still allowing a sufficient
number of spawners to escape is a terrific challenge for biologists,
particularly where sockeyes from different watersheds mix together before
ascending their individual natal streams. To control these mixed-population
fisheries, biologists use a variety of tools—from emergency fishing
closures to aerial, tower, and sonar counting of fish in rivers—to
determine the greatest number of harvestable salmon in each watershed.
At
the same time, biologists must allow adequate salmon escapement.
But what is adequate? For decades now, biologists, concentrating
their efforts almost entirely on producing the maximum sustainable
harvests, have assumed that numbers are all that count. If enough
salmon throughout the run escape fishermen’s nets and ascend
the rivers, the reasoning goes, then spawners will fill all the
tributaries and habitats capable of supporting salmon, thus maintaining
their biodiversity. But is this true? Managers point to the record
runs of past years as proof that their method works, but harvest
numbers alone are hardly indicative of overall diversity in the
bay’s hundreds, perhaps thousands, of individual tributaries.
Who can say which creek, stream, or rivulet contains salmon with
the specific genetic code that stands the best chance in a warming
ocean or unusually cold winter, let alone whether those particular
fish are spawning? No one knows because no one is watching individual
spawning streams each year to make sure an adequate number of salmon
return to each and every one.
Aside
from biodiversity, are enough salmon escaping to perpetuate the
runs? Some researchers are coming to believe that large, so-called
excess, escapements are more important than previously assumed,
because they build resiliency in salmon ecosystems by increasing
their capacity for future productivity. Smaller, weaker populations,
like those of the Nushagak River and Lake Clark, prosper in excess
escapement years. At the same time, abundant fish carcasses provide
essential nutrients for successive generations, as well as the myriad
forms of aquatic and terrestrial life that both sustain and depend
upon salmon.

These questions have prompted some scientists to suggest that instead
of managing the fishery for maximum sustained yield, it may be time
to replace that goal with a new one: minimum sustainable escapement.
|