Potential Effects of Contaminants on Fraser River Sockeye Salmon

WeaknessesThere is a lot <strong>of</strong> repetition in the document (e.g. start <strong>of</strong> introduction and summary verysimilar as is the executive summary), removing some <strong>of</strong> this would make the documentmore concise.Response: Agreed. The Executive Summary was revised as recommended.In addition, the rest <strong>of</strong> the document was reviewed to identify opportunities tomake the text more concise.Many abbreviations used - difficult to follow for somebody not an expert in the field.Response: Agree. The text was edited to limit the use <strong>of</strong> abbreviations.While some abbreviations still exist in the Tables and Figures, abbreviationshave largely been eliminated from the main text.There is a lot <strong>of</strong> discussion on the sockeye decline over the last 20 years and theincrease in many <strong>of</strong> the contaminants –it would be interesting to see how the high 2010returns fit into this picture.Response: A discussion <strong>of</strong> the implications <strong>of</strong> the high return <strong>of</strong> sockeyesalmon in 2010 on the main findings <strong>of</strong> the evaluation was added to the text (SeeChapter 8 for more information).The authors focused primarily on contaminants in the FW phase; are there anyconcerns in the marine environments that should be considered?Response: Yes, the potential effects <strong>of</strong> exposure to contaminants in themarine environment needs to be considered, particularly in the Strait <strong>of</strong> Georgiawhere there are discharges from various municipal wastewater treatment plantsand industrial facilities. Such an evaluation was beyond the scope <strong>of</strong> thisinvestigation, however.2. Evaluate the interpretation <strong>of</strong> the available data, and the validity <strong>of</strong> anyderived conclusions. Overall, does the report represent the best scientificinterpretation <strong>of</strong> the available data?The report does a very good job in interpreting the available data.Response: No response is necessary.3. Are there additional quantitative or qualitative ways to evaluate the subjectarea not considered in this report? How could the analysis be improved?The authors focused primarily on contaminants in the FW phase; are there anyconcerns in the marine environments that should be considered?Response: Yes. However, evaluation <strong>of</strong> the potential effects on sockeyeA-8