Of the 91,000 tons of finfish Canada exports every year, 78,000 tons of it is salmon. The leading countries to import this seafood are the United States, Japan, China, Denmark, and the United Kingdom. So the question is why do they need all this and what would happen to their eating habits as consumers if they lost some of this salmon?
The United States imports 62% of Canada's seafood exports (DFO: Minister Hearn Announces Fish and Seafood Export Figures for 2006). Salmon is the most popular fish to eat in the US, though most of this is farmed. (Here I ask, are we only looking at wild catch? because in the US that is really a thing of the past. Almost all the stuff we eat is farmed.) Wild salmon can go for as much as $15 a pound, sometimes higher. This is a delicacy compared to the usual 9$ a pound for the farmed stuff. I must comment now that the US gets most of its salmon from Alaska, so a closed maritime area in Canada might not effect us Americans too much. There is also the matter of Americans eating 118 lbs of red meat a year vs 15.6 lbs of fish, despite all health benefits. I don't think many of us would starve, or for that matter even have to really change our eating habits, if the maritime area was temporarily closed. (American consumers are falling for salmon, hook, line, and sinker)
Japan is already feeling the effect of less wild fish on the market. It is the world's top consumer of surimi, which is made of ground up cod. The decline of cod has negatively effected its market. I also assume it purchases other seafood, such as salmon, from Canada for it's eating habits, though I can't find any hard data to back myself up. The increase demand for seafood from other countries (such as China) and the declining supply has caused some Japanese seafood companies to go into bankruptcy. I think Japan would not handle closed maritime areas as well as US. (Japan losing leverage in seafood trade)
China has increased its imports of seafood recently (I assume this is partially from Canada, but I can't find anything to back me up) due to increased wealth of citizens. This increased wealth is mainly concentrated on coastal regions, and does not extend as well inland. This means that consumers here are willing to pay a little more for fish because they are use to and enjoy the taste of seafood (they live in a coastal region after all) and they have more money. This is once again not a starving issue, but China is a fast growing nation might continue to demand fish, even at higher prices. (sorry forgot to write down which article this came from)
Denmark has disapeared of the internet map of seafood markets. Sorry, lack of data. I'm sure they love their Canadian salmon.
In the United Kingdom there is a small movement to encourage people to eat more fish for the health benefits. "Fish is one of the most valuable sources of protein, vitamins and minerals to include in a balanced diet and the FSA advise that everyone eat 2 portions a week for these reasons" (Morrisons Make Seafood Easy). I do not know how large of an impact a closed maritime area would have on such a small fad. Once again, not a starving issue.
I am pleased to say that I don't think many people would starve is CANADA shut down some of its fishing. There would probably be some large economic consequences in Japan, but otherwise the price increase would only effect relatively wealthy individuals. This means the nutritional effects would be minimal at best.
Got all my resources from LexisNexis because it ACTUALLY LETS YOU READ THE ARTICLE.