I was flipping through the Toronto Star, when I came across a short blurb about the Ringwood Fish Culture Station. Briefly mentioned is how the government opened the station in 1982 but was forced to cut funding in 2006. Not mentioned, is why the government opened the station.
During the 1980s, there was growing concern of the rapidly declining stocks of Canadian fish. In response to this, the government started to fund hatcheries in hopes of bolstering the declining populations and even re-introducing species to areas where they had been extirpated. Fisheries opened all over the country and the government kept pouring money into them, until budget cuts forced an end to the spending spree. What the government failed to inform that public was that the money spent on hatcheries might as well have been thrown into the water in hopes of a dam springing up.
Fish instinctively return to their hatching site for spawning, thus hatchery-born fish never stray very far away from where they were born, so it would be impossible to repopulate areas with hatchery-born fish unless the hatchery was near to the desired site. Unfortunately, most sites are so polluted or being used for other commercial purposes that setting up a hatchery there isn't possible. Also, because the fish are raised in artificial conditions, they are unable to attract a mate from the wild population because they haven't learned the proper mate attraction rituals.
As if it wasn't enough having the government pouring money into hatcheries, the article goes on to proudly state that the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters and the Toronto Sportsmen's Show raise $50,000 annually in order to keep the Ringwood facility running. My quibbles with this do no stem from the organizations that support the facility. On the contrary, I'm pro-fishing and pro-hunting. What does irritate me about this article is that the OFAH is using the fundraising as a PR gesture and it's an incredibly useless one at that. These associations should be focusing more on the conservation of key breeding habitat instead of funding breeding programs that have been shown, through scientific research, to be ineffective at best or harmful to the natural populations at worst. At least if their money is being spent on endeavours that can bring scientifically-proved benefits to the species, it can bring positive attention for both parties, which is something they could use considering the controversial nature of OFAH.
During the 1980s, there was growing concern of the rapidly declining stocks of Canadian fish. In response to this, the government started to fund hatcheries in hopes of bolstering the declining populations and even re-introducing species to areas where they had been extirpated. Fisheries opened all over the country and the government kept pouring money into them, until budget cuts forced an end to the spending spree. What the government failed to inform that public was that the money spent on hatcheries might as well have been thrown into the water in hopes of a dam springing up.
Fish instinctively return to their hatching site for spawning, thus hatchery-born fish never stray very far away from where they were born, so it would be impossible to repopulate areas with hatchery-born fish unless the hatchery was near to the desired site. Unfortunately, most sites are so polluted or being used for other commercial purposes that setting up a hatchery there isn't possible. Also, because the fish are raised in artificial conditions, they are unable to attract a mate from the wild population because they haven't learned the proper mate attraction rituals.
As if it wasn't enough having the government pouring money into hatcheries, the article goes on to proudly state that the Ontario Federation of Anglers and Hunters and the Toronto Sportsmen's Show raise $50,000 annually in order to keep the Ringwood facility running. My quibbles with this do no stem from the organizations that support the facility. On the contrary, I'm pro-fishing and pro-hunting. What does irritate me about this article is that the OFAH is using the fundraising as a PR gesture and it's an incredibly useless one at that. These associations should be focusing more on the conservation of key breeding habitat instead of funding breeding programs that have been shown, through scientific research, to be ineffective at best or harmful to the natural populations at worst. At least if their money is being spent on endeavours that can bring scientifically-proved benefits to the species, it can bring positive attention for both parties, which is something they could use considering the controversial nature of OFAH.
No comments:
Post a Comment