Putting Canada First Means Growing Canadian Food. The 2029 Ban Sends It Overseas.

The Government of Canada is committed to food affordability, food security, and sustainable food production. It signed the G20 Rome Declaration, recognizing that sustainable food systems contribute to food security, climate resilience, and biodiversity. It joined the High-Level Panel for a Sustainable Ocean Economy, alongside 17 countries committed to building sustainable ocean industries.

The federal government has said it wants to make life more affordable. It has said it wants to build a stronger Canadian economy. It has said it is committed to economic reconciliation with Indigenous peoples.

The 2029 salmon farming ban runs against every one of those positions.

What Canada Committed To

The G20 Rome Declaration, which Canada endorsed, recognizes that promoting sustainable food systems and strengthening food value chains will contribute to food security and help address climate change and biodiversity loss.

The United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization identifies aquaculture as central to meeting Sustainable Development Goals. Global food demand is expected to increase by 35 to 56 percent between 2010 and 2050. There are roughly 35 growing seasons between now and the point where the world's population reaches 10 billion people.

Canada's own ocean economy strategy has named aquaculture as a sector with room to grow. The country has clean coastal waters, strong regulatory frameworks, and genuine Indigenous partnerships. Companies operating in BC ranked first and second globally on the Coller FAIRR Protein Producer Index, which assessed 60 of the world's largest protein-producing companies on environmental, social, and governance risk.

Canada has the conditions the world is looking for. And the 2029 ban is set to shut it down.

The Environmental Case Canada Is Ignoring

Global food production contributes about 30 percent of total greenhouse gas emissions. Roughly 70 percent of those emissions come from land-based agriculture and associated land use change. By comparison, oceans produce about 17 percent of the world's per capita consumption of animal protein while occupying a fraction of the environmental footprint.

Farm-raised salmon has the lowest average carbon footprint of any major animal protein. It requires less land, less feed, less freshwater, and produces fewer greenhouse gas emissions than chicken, pork, or beef. Canadian-made feed has a lower carbon footprint than equivalent feed produced in Norway or Chile.

The 2029 ban takes one of the most resource-efficient food production systems in the world - operating in Canadian waters, using Canadian-made feed, with the lowest carbon profile in the protein category - and replaces it with imports shipped across oceans.

That is the opposite of climate-aligned food policy.

The Affordability Contradiction

Canadian families are under pressure at the grocery store. The federal government has made affordability a stated priority.

BC produces approximately 56,000 tonnes of farm-raised salmon every year. That is enough for roughly 380 million meals. In 2024, farmed salmon imports from Norway, Chile, and Scotland already totalled over $700 million.

The ban would remove domestic production and increase Canadian dependence on those imports. That does not help affordability. It increases costs, adds supply chain risk, and removes any Canadian influence over the price of salmon on Canadian shelves.

The Reconciliation Contradiction

The federal government has committed to economic reconciliation. As of 2022, the salmon farming sector directly and indirectly employed more than 700 Indigenous people and provided $51 million in total annual direct economic benefit to First Nations communities.

17 Coastal First Nations have formed a coalition asking the federal government to reverse the ban. These Nations have negotiated partnerships, built businesses, and created employment around salmon farming in their territories. They are not asking to be protected. They are asking to keep building.

The ban does not come with an alternative economic plan for these communities. It removes a working economic base and offers nothing in its place.

One Policy. Multiple Contradictions.

The federal government says it wants affordable food. The ban raises food costs.

The federal government says it supports sustainable food systems. The ban replaces low-carbon domestic production with higher-carbon imports.

The federal government says it is committed to reconciliation. The ban eliminates the economic foundation that multiple First Nations have built for themselves.

The federal government says it wants to build Canada. The ban sends production, investment, and jobs to Norway, Chile, and Scotland.

Reversing the ban is a practical step within federal control. It would align food policy with affordability, sustainability, reconciliation, and economic resilience - all priorities the government has already named.

Canada should not outsource its food future.

References

(1) Government of Canada. (2021). G20 Rome Leaders' Declaration. [Ch01 ref 26]

(2) Stuchtey, M.R. et al. (2023). Ocean Solutions That Benefit People, Nature and the Economy. In: Lubchenco, J. & Haugan, P.M. (eds.) The Blue Compendium. Springer. [Ch01 ref 3]

(3) Crippa, M. et al. (2021). Food systems are responsible for a third of global anthropogenic GHG emissions. Nature Food, 2(3), 198-209. [Ch01 ref 27]

(4) van Dijk, M. et al. (2021). A meta-analysis of projected global food demand and population at risk of hunger. Nature Food, 2(7), 494-501. [Ch01 ref 22]

(5) FAIRR Initiative. (2023). Coller FAIRR Protein Producer Index. [Ch07 ref 11]

(6) BC Salmon Farmers Association. (2024). Modern Salmon Farming in BC: A Review, Chapter 1: Caring for Coastal BC, p. 1-28 to 1-35.

(7) First Nations for Finfish Stewardship. (2022). The Reality is: Salmon Farming is a path to self-determination and reconciliation for many First Nations in coastal BC. [Ch04 ref 15]

Ready to act?