wildmanyeah
Crew Member
aM already claimed on social media the Brighton is sea lice free perhaps you can sk her for the data
Aquaculture improving?..The Fish Farm Thread
- Thread starter islandboy
- Start date
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
We should start seeing salmon stocks recover and the big swings in survival start to stop if everything the advocates promised us becomes true. I remeber claims of up two atlest 2% increase in ocean survival being claimed on here. That’s a double or trouble increases in returns.
So should be some great salmon and returns
So should be some great salmon and returns
way of the future:
salmonbusiness.com
Company plans to build up to 28 closed compartments on land to produce 30,000 tonnes of salmon annually
Averøy Seafood submitted an application for permission to establish a land-based salmon farm in Tøfta, Western Norway. The site will have an annual production of 30,000 tonnes. This is according to documents that SalmonBusiness has been given access to. According to Averøy Seafood, the closed...
salmonbusiness.com
G
gone fishin
Guest
“A committee appointed by the Norwegian government to evaluate aquaculture taxation released a report recommending the basic rate be set at 40 percent, a move that could bring in proceeds of around NOK 7 billion (over $770 million US).”
How much tax does the Provincial, Federal and or local Government collect from our West Coast Atlantic Salmon Fish Farms?
How much tax does the Provincial, Federal and or local Government collect from our West Coast Atlantic Salmon Fish Farms?
nowheres near what they pay in Norway, and laxer regulations wrt wild salmon. No wonder Canada is attractive...
academic.oup.com
Prediction of the salmon lice infestation pressure in a Norwegian fjord
Abstract. A further growth in the Norwegian aquaculture industry might potentially be hampered by the conclusion that it is not environmentally sustainable
academic.oup.com
Last edited:
cuttlefish
Well-Known Member
Good question.
For annual federal licence fees look here; https://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/licence-permis/index-eng.html
For annual BC fees look on page 12 of this pdf file; https://www2.gov.bc.ca/assets/gov/f...use/land-water-use/crown-land/aquaculture.pdf
For BC regional and municipal taxes paid see the page below compiled by the Regional District of Mount Waddington planning staff in 2014 for a UBCM convention.
A pittance really when you add it all up and compare it to Norway.
Oh, and then there is the money paid to various bands for their support. Unknown.
Last edited:
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Awesome!!
POLL: Should B.C. fish farms be moved on land? - North Island Gazette
Should B.C. fish farms be moved on land?
G
gone fishin
Guest
I think it would be a stretch to suggest the majority of Canadians actually support keeping and expanding Open Atlantic Salmon Net Pens in our oceans.POLL: Should B.C. fish farms be moved on land? - North Island Gazette
Should B.C. fish farms be moved on land?www.northislandgazette.com
some very accurate comments...
Angela Koch
Everyone is commenting how easy it is to find a way to vote over and over on this poll...bogus poll
Like · Reply · 8h
Amber Falyce Alfred
Trick question, if they're on land are they just going to take our fresh water from the river and pollute our rivers and oceans with the outflow
Like · Reply · 1 · 9h
Heather Orr Lansdowne
Open pen fish farms should be on land or not at all.
Like · Reply · 1 · 10h
Mark Prendergast
moving them would create jobs and end the lunacey!
Like · Reply · 1 · 10h
Ray Mason
LOL all the fish farm workers voting.
Like · Reply · 3 · 11h
Last edited by a moderator:
Bryan Allen
Well-Known Member
I phone MP Rachel Blaney's office in CR and talked to her admin person. She fully supports the decision to move the farms, and is getting a lot of flack for it. I stressed how important it is for her to not weaken her support. How about making a call to her office , stating you are a sport fisher, and you strongly support the decision to move the farms onto land and away from areas like the Broughtons and Johnstone Strait. Campbell River # is (250) 287-9388 , 1-800-667-8404, Powell River Office (604) 489-2286. email-- Rachel.Blaney@parl.gc.ca
G
gone fishin
Guest
Fish farm lobbyists trying to write their own rules
We were shocked to learn the new aquaculture act may exempt factory fish farms from important environmental laws like the Fisheries Act.
Stop Fish Farm Lobbyists from Writing the Aquaculture Act | Watershed Watch Salmon Society
We were shocked to learn the new aquaculture act may exempt factory fish farms from important environmental laws like the Fisheries Act.
Stop Fish Farm Lobbyists from Writing the Aquaculture Act | Watershed Watch Salmon Society
Unfortunately, not a surprise, GF. That's how this whole "We gotta have an act of our own to exempt us from environmental oversight" thing started.
It all started after the Morton decision (2009), and DFO and the feds got handed back regulation for the industry. Must've been quite the strategy meetings afterwards by the PR companies and the BCSFA & CAIA. Would have been interesting to be a bird on the wall listening in.
In 2010, CAIA (Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance) wrote a letter to DFO pushing for a separate federal aquaculture statute and clearer property rights for aquaculturists (http://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/206/30...OCALHOS/EXHIBITFILES/EXH_1626___CAN384486.ZIP).
This initiative was supported and driven up the ladder in DFO by upper-level DFO managers (e.g. Trevor Swerdfager & James Smith). All of this is outlined in the Cohen exhibits. Would have been interesting to be a bird on the wall listening in there too when the FF lobbyists were having those closed door meetings with upper-level DFO.
By 2013 – Pamela Parker (executive director of the Atlantic Canada Fish Farmers Association) who also later testified at the Senate Committee hearings on aquaculture that proposed a new Aquaculture Act by 2016) was lobbying for a “New Aquaculture Strategy” by 2013.
They did get their way already through the "Aquaculture Activities Regulations" (AAR) which ended-up exempting the industry from the "Release of a Deleterious Substance" provisions of the Fisheries Act. Originally, those regulations were supposed to do many things - including setting sea lice levels and other environmental issues. AFTER consultations - the industry got it's way as they have been used to doing - and those regulations were hollowed-out to merely exempt industry from s. 36 of the Fisheries Act for their sea lice treatments since it was apparent by then that slice in the feed was not working due to sea lice resistance to it's effects.
Later in 2018, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found the AAR deficient in both their design and implementation (not a surprise, neither). Specifically, the Commissioner found that DFO did not assess whether the AARs were adequate to minimize harm to wild fish, that DFO was not validating the information in the industry self-reports, and that the AAR were not sufficiently enforced to minimize harm to wild fish: https://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/ae-ve/evaluations/16-17/96031-eng.html
I'm hoping this newest consultation is not merely smoke and mirrors so they can push through what the industry always wanted, 10+ years ago. It sure highlights the conflicts of interest in having the promotor and booster also be the regulator.
It all started after the Morton decision (2009), and DFO and the feds got handed back regulation for the industry. Must've been quite the strategy meetings afterwards by the PR companies and the BCSFA & CAIA. Would have been interesting to be a bird on the wall listening in.
In 2010, CAIA (Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance) wrote a letter to DFO pushing for a separate federal aquaculture statute and clearer property rights for aquaculturists (http://epe.lac-bac.gc.ca/100/206/30...OCALHOS/EXHIBITFILES/EXH_1626___CAN384486.ZIP).
This initiative was supported and driven up the ladder in DFO by upper-level DFO managers (e.g. Trevor Swerdfager & James Smith). All of this is outlined in the Cohen exhibits. Would have been interesting to be a bird on the wall listening in there too when the FF lobbyists were having those closed door meetings with upper-level DFO.
By 2013 – Pamela Parker (executive director of the Atlantic Canada Fish Farmers Association) who also later testified at the Senate Committee hearings on aquaculture that proposed a new Aquaculture Act by 2016) was lobbying for a “New Aquaculture Strategy” by 2013.
They did get their way already through the "Aquaculture Activities Regulations" (AAR) which ended-up exempting the industry from the "Release of a Deleterious Substance" provisions of the Fisheries Act. Originally, those regulations were supposed to do many things - including setting sea lice levels and other environmental issues. AFTER consultations - the industry got it's way as they have been used to doing - and those regulations were hollowed-out to merely exempt industry from s. 36 of the Fisheries Act for their sea lice treatments since it was apparent by then that slice in the feed was not working due to sea lice resistance to it's effects.
Later in 2018, the Commissioner of the Environment and Sustainable Development found the AAR deficient in both their design and implementation (not a surprise, neither). Specifically, the Commissioner found that DFO did not assess whether the AARs were adequate to minimize harm to wild fish, that DFO was not validating the information in the industry self-reports, and that the AAR were not sufficiently enforced to minimize harm to wild fish: https://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/ae-ve/evaluations/16-17/96031-eng.html
I'm hoping this newest consultation is not merely smoke and mirrors so they can push through what the industry always wanted, 10+ years ago. It sure highlights the conflicts of interest in having the promotor and booster also be the regulator.
Last edited:
cuttlefish
Well-Known Member
I can see the need for an Aquaculture Act that would be similar to the existing Department of Agriculture and Agri-Foods Act (https://lois-laws.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/A-9/page-1.html#h-9984). Here is what that Act covers;
4 The powers, duties and functions of the Minister extend to and include all matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction, not by law assigned to any other department, board or agency of the Government of Canada (my emphasis), relating to
If salmon farming was conducted on land (similar to the vast majority of trout farming) instead of in the ocean, there would be no need for all the other regulatory riggamarole that has kept DFO tied up in a knot wrt conflicting mandates. Fisheries and Oceans Canada could deal exclusively with protecting the fish, the fisheries and the oceans. Not that they have been doing such a great job. Still, their job would be a lot easier. IMHO.
Powers, Duties and Functions of the Minister
4 The powers, duties and functions of the Minister extend to and include all matters over which Parliament has jurisdiction, not by law assigned to any other department, board or agency of the Government of Canada (my emphasis), relating to
- (a) agriculture;
- (b) products derived from agriculture; and
- (c) research related to agriculture and products derived from agriculture including the operation of experimental farm stations.
If salmon farming was conducted on land (similar to the vast majority of trout farming) instead of in the ocean, there would be no need for all the other regulatory riggamarole that has kept DFO tied up in a knot wrt conflicting mandates. Fisheries and Oceans Canada could deal exclusively with protecting the fish, the fisheries and the oceans. Not that they have been doing such a great job. Still, their job would be a lot easier. IMHO.
Last edited:
Here we go - AGAIN!:
www.northislandgazette.com
QUESTION OF THE WEEK POLL: Should B.C. fish farms be moved on land?
Should B.C. fish farms be moved on land?
www.northislandgazette.com
Similar threads
