SALMONID ENHANCEMENT 57 



I cannot say, given available information, whether the 

 production targets for Phase I of the program could be 

 achieved at less cost by enhancement through manage- 

 ment, but it seems to me that this alternative deserved a 

 good deal more analysis than it received. However, the 

 funds for Phase I are now effectively committed, and it is 

 perhaps pointless to even speculate on what might have 

 been. But certainly management alternatives should be 

 given much more consideration in plaiming future 

 enhancement. All this points to the need to integrate 

 enhancement, fishery management and habitat protec- 

 tion, which I will turn to below. 



PLANNING FOR THE FUTURE 



I have reviewed the accomplishments of the enhance- 

 ment program and the concerns about it in some detail 

 because I believe we must take these matters carefully 

 into consideration in designing future policy in this mat- 

 ter. Phase I is a bold experiment in resource develop- 

 ment. Moreover, it has been well organized. Particularly 

 impressive is the thoroughness of project planning, the 

 scope of the benefits considered and the rigor of project 

 evaluations. The scrutiny these projects have received 

 from program planners and boards is probably unsur- 

 passed in governmental planning of major expenditures. 



The end of Phase I is now fast approaching, and deci- 

 sions must be made for the future. The federal and pro- 

 vincial governments prudently agreed at the beginning 

 that future undertakings would hinge on the results of the 

 Phase I experiment. So we must take stock of what has 

 been accomplished, weigh carefully what has been 

 learned, and plan accordingly. 



According to current expectations, the program will 

 result in an enhanced production of fish that must be 

 judged satisfactory in terms of the original targets and the 

 funds expended. The Department seems confident that 

 these expectations will be realized.'* The Salmonid 

 Enhancement Board has also indicated its confidence by 

 recommending in its 1979/80 report to the two Ministers, 

 that planning should proceed for the next phase, and the 

 federal Cabinet recently allocated $4.5 million for this 

 purpose. The board reconfirmed its belief that salmon 

 catches could be increased through enhancement by 150 

 million pounds annually, and suggested that the second 

 phase should aim at completing projects, over a 10-year 

 period, capable of increasing production by 100 million 

 pounds. I understand that the board, on the advice of 

 staff, has recently amended this objective to 50 million 

 pounds of increased annual production over a 5-year 

 period. Cost estimates are not yet available, but this pro- 

 gram is expected to cost much more than 1 50 million in 

 1982 dollars. In addition to these official endorsements, 

 the enhancement program enjoys considerable support 

 from the fishing community and the wider public. 



Nevertheless, the proof of an experiment is in its 

 results. In this case the results are not yet manifest and 

 are fraught with uncertainty. I must emphasize that the 

 program will be successful only if among other things, 

 the current expectations about increased returns are real- 

 ized; the mixed fishing problem can be solved to protect 

 wild stocks; lake fertilization proves itself; fleet expan- 

 sion can be controlled; and it can be demonstrated that 

 equivalent benefits cannot be obtained simply by better 

 fisheries management. At present, we simply do not have 

 the evidence to be assured that any of these conditions 

 will be met. I am therefore compelled to advise the gov- 

 ernment to be cautious, to address itself to the obstacles 

 to successful enhancement, and to carefully evaluate 

 results. 



My terms of reference require me to make recommen- 

 dations to ensure that the public interest is protected in 

 provisions for resource management and enhancement, 

 among other things. My proposals relating to future 

 enhancement plans are made with reference to this 

 instruction, and the current uncertainties surrounding the 

 results of the program so far. 



Short-Term Plans 



Plans for the immediate future must consider the sub- 

 stantial staff of specialized personnel the Department has 

 built up for the enhancement effort, and the cohesiveness 

 they have developed. Any serious interruptions of the 

 enhancement program would result in losing this capabil- 

 ity and momentum, which would be costly for any 

 renewed effort. So while I advocate a cautious approach 

 to the next phase, I also propose urgent attention to eval- 

 uating existing projects so that the appropriate direction 

 and dimensions of future activities can be clarified as 

 quickly as possible. 



I therefore recommend that — 



1. The Salmonid Enhancement Program should proceed 

 with planned projects for the remainder of Phase I, 

 according to its established priorities. 



2. A concerted effort should be devoted to monitoring 

 and comprehensively evaluating the results of projects 

 already in place. Careful attention should be paid in 

 these evaluations to the implications of enhanced 

 stocks for fisheries management. 



3. Planning for future enhancement should proceed, with 

 appropriate funding (not out of the Phase I budget), 

 for the next two years as determined with the advice of 

 the Salmonid Enhancement Board. 



