fish farm siting criteria & politics
- Thread starter agentaqua
- Start date
The Times Colonist, 11th November 2009
Where have all the Fraser sockeye gone? Judge will hear evidence
By D.C. Reid
You may recall the DFO estimated the Fraser River sockeye run at 10.6 million fish and that it collapsed to 1.37 million this past summer.
Paul Sproat, head guy in B.C., issued a note in the Globe and Mail saying it sure wasn't fish farm sea lice killing the fry on their way to sea. He and the DFO are the only people in B.C. who think that. Such comments are disingenuous because Minister Gail Shea was in Norway trying to woo more Norwegian fish farms to B.C., something that to anyone who knows anything about Pacific salmon seems appallingly out of touch. I am aware of four different DFO scientists that either left DFO for its mismanagement, or took early retirement and then strongly criticized their former employer.
To be fair, there are several plausible explanations: river temperature, river pollution and unfavourable Georgia Strait water conditions. Here is the evidence. In 2007 the huge outgoing cohort had among it 139 million fry from the Chilko and Quesnel alone. DFO has not been forthcoming about revealing their own net seines for fry in 2007 found only 157 Chilko fry in Georgia Strait. This strongly suggests that an in-river kill may well have been the cause -- because of higher temperatures. At 18.8 C the Fraser temperature was just below where adult sockeye begin dying. But predators in the Strait of Georgia now include a large, growing population of hake and pollock. Living at more than 100 metres down, though, they are probably far below the plankton-feeding sockeye that have to congregate near the surface for feeding.
But by the time the fry hit Campbell River it is pretty clear that fish farm sea lice killed them. At 28 sea lice on average per sockeye fry, that would kill every one that migrated up Johnstone Strait. But sockeye also move out to the Pacific through Juan de Fuca where there are no fish farms. This suggests that more Fraser sockeye should have come back than the numbers that did, hence low ocean survival may also be a culprit. Then there is the sticky issue that the Harrison River sockeye (part of the Fraser run) came back in buoyant numbers later in the summer. This tends to weaken the low ocean survival theory because they, too, should not have survived.
But one of the real stories is that the DFO knew the fry were in short supply in 2007, after the seine tests, a full two years before the collapse took place. In the face of this knowledge, they should have issued a low sockeye number. Fortunately enough, B.C. residents, environmentalists, commercial, sport and aboriginal fishing sectors and media have complained so much that Stephen Harper announced a judicial review into this subject to release its final report in spring 2011.
Some terms of reference have been revealed and Bruce Cohen, a B.C. Supreme Court judge with some experience in sustainable industry, is now setting up shop for an inquiry. He has the power to compel someone to give evidence and be truthful. That means DFO staff are somewhat protected in the course of testifying. A whole lot more scientists will come forward, and others. Cohen's interim report is due in summer 2010.
dcreid@catchsalmonbc.com
http://www.timescolonist.com/sports...e+Judge+will+hear+evidence/2210267/story.html
Where have all the Fraser sockeye gone? Judge will hear evidence
By D.C. Reid
You may recall the DFO estimated the Fraser River sockeye run at 10.6 million fish and that it collapsed to 1.37 million this past summer.
Paul Sproat, head guy in B.C., issued a note in the Globe and Mail saying it sure wasn't fish farm sea lice killing the fry on their way to sea. He and the DFO are the only people in B.C. who think that. Such comments are disingenuous because Minister Gail Shea was in Norway trying to woo more Norwegian fish farms to B.C., something that to anyone who knows anything about Pacific salmon seems appallingly out of touch. I am aware of four different DFO scientists that either left DFO for its mismanagement, or took early retirement and then strongly criticized their former employer.
To be fair, there are several plausible explanations: river temperature, river pollution and unfavourable Georgia Strait water conditions. Here is the evidence. In 2007 the huge outgoing cohort had among it 139 million fry from the Chilko and Quesnel alone. DFO has not been forthcoming about revealing their own net seines for fry in 2007 found only 157 Chilko fry in Georgia Strait. This strongly suggests that an in-river kill may well have been the cause -- because of higher temperatures. At 18.8 C the Fraser temperature was just below where adult sockeye begin dying. But predators in the Strait of Georgia now include a large, growing population of hake and pollock. Living at more than 100 metres down, though, they are probably far below the plankton-feeding sockeye that have to congregate near the surface for feeding.
But by the time the fry hit Campbell River it is pretty clear that fish farm sea lice killed them. At 28 sea lice on average per sockeye fry, that would kill every one that migrated up Johnstone Strait. But sockeye also move out to the Pacific through Juan de Fuca where there are no fish farms. This suggests that more Fraser sockeye should have come back than the numbers that did, hence low ocean survival may also be a culprit. Then there is the sticky issue that the Harrison River sockeye (part of the Fraser run) came back in buoyant numbers later in the summer. This tends to weaken the low ocean survival theory because they, too, should not have survived.
But one of the real stories is that the DFO knew the fry were in short supply in 2007, after the seine tests, a full two years before the collapse took place. In the face of this knowledge, they should have issued a low sockeye number. Fortunately enough, B.C. residents, environmentalists, commercial, sport and aboriginal fishing sectors and media have complained so much that Stephen Harper announced a judicial review into this subject to release its final report in spring 2011.
Some terms of reference have been revealed and Bruce Cohen, a B.C. Supreme Court judge with some experience in sustainable industry, is now setting up shop for an inquiry. He has the power to compel someone to give evidence and be truthful. That means DFO staff are somewhat protected in the course of testifying. A whole lot more scientists will come forward, and others. Cohen's interim report is due in summer 2010.
dcreid@catchsalmonbc.com
http://www.timescolonist.com/sports...e+Judge+will+hear+evidence/2210267/story.html
S
sockeyefry
Guest
"...Here is the evidence. In 2007 the huge outgoing cohort had among it 139 million fry from the Chilko and Quesnel alone. DFO has not been forthcoming about revealing their own net seines for fry in 2007 found only 157 Chilko fry in Georgia Strait. This strongly suggests that an in-river kill may well have been the cause -- because of higher temperatures...."
WTF?
He states the real answer, then promptly ignores it to blame sea lice?
Guess the truth isn't part of his agenda
WTF?
He states the real answer, then promptly ignores it to blame sea lice?
Guess the truth isn't part of his agenda
Charlie
Well-Known Member
"Guess the truth isn't part of his agenda"
Sockeye, I have to agree with you! I personally don’t see much merit in his whole article? But, again… as I stated in another thread, the media’s job is not to educate the public, it is to sell papers!
I don’t believe there is any evidence “published”, is there? Isn’t that why a judicial review was called for? I do believe DFO “really” has the answers! Hopefully the judicial review will shed the “correct light” DFO is not wanting to share on this problem?
This is kind of an interesting tech report? Pay particular attention to the DFO statements about the “Fraser River Sockeye”! It is amazing how things can change and be changed!
http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Technical%20Report/TR5/page%2065-66(Welch).pdf
Sockeye, I have to agree with you! I personally don’t see much merit in his whole article? But, again… as I stated in another thread, the media’s job is not to educate the public, it is to sell papers!
Yep, Paul Sproat, “issued a note in the Globe and Mail saying it sure wasn't fish farm sea lice killing the fry on their way to sea.” Which Sproat did make that statement, in words-to-that-effect? I would have to say that was not a political correct comment to make!
I have to question the temperature relationship? There is a stress factor that begins around that 18o figure, but it also has to do with number of “stress” days in relation to the temperature. I believe most studies are using a threshold of 20oC as it is the upper incipient lethal temperature (UILT) for salmon – “the water temperature at which approximately half of the population would survive with permanent exposure. This threshold is also consistent with the observations that during unusually warm years (mean daily temperatures above 20o) Fraser River sockeye hormonal and stress indicators suggested that fish were suffering significant physical stress and maturation impairment. Exposure of salmon to temperatures in excess of 20oC also appears to be associated with a much higher risk of disease.” and as we know the lethal temperature is 24.4o C. 2007 was not a warm year, and if the Fraser temperature was 18.8oC the stress factor would be small and Sockeye loss a “minuscule” issue! Plus, we also know they got out of the river. What is not certain is “any” disease? Or, where the disease originated from?
Do I believe there is a connection between the collapse and farms, yes! Is it “pretty clear” – NO! “At 28 sea lice on average per sockeye fry, that would kill every one that migrated up Johnstone Strait.” I would love to see his reference and any pictures substantiating that claim, on average? I have spent way to much time reading on this subject, and I don't recall ever seeing in numbers like that?
“One of the real stories”, might be? If I remember the articles I have read correctly, DFO followed the Fraser Sockeye north to Campbell River without any issues. Once north of Campbell River - where they “lost” them? So, did they know - I believe they did?
I don’t believe there is any evidence “published”, is there? Isn’t that why a judicial review was called for? I do believe DFO “really” has the answers! Hopefully the judicial review will shed the “correct light” DFO is not wanting to share on this problem?
This is kind of an interesting tech report? Pay particular attention to the DFO statements about the “Fraser River Sockeye”! It is amazing how things can change and be changed!
http://www.npafc.org/new/publications/Technical%20Report/TR5/page%2065-66(Welch).pdf
The Dawn of a New Era in Fisheries Management in Canada - Lets Make it Happen
http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/
Sign letter to Canadian Minister of Fisheries asking for the laws of Canada to be Applied to fish farming (http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?hl=en&formkey=cEkxX3p3MGFBbWNVVGNVU3lxQnBwQmc6MA..)
On November 5, 2009 Prime Minister Harper stood in the House of Commons and announced there would be a Judicial Inquiry into the disappearance of 10 million Fraser sockeye. At that moment all of us became responsible for the future of wild fish in Canadian waters.
We are no longer on the outside. Thank you for the 100s of emails. Many of you are cautious about feeling any sense of hope and you are right. Many of you feel this success was due more to my work than to all of you and you are wrong. I could have written 500 more scientific papers, and blogged like a southeast storm to no avail. The Prime Minister responded because he could see the people of Canada demanded this.
The terms of this Judicial Inquiry are both specific and sweeping enough not only find out what killed our sockeye, but also to diagnose the sickness in Fisheries and Oceans Canada and prescribe a remedy to the benefit of all fisheries across Canada (http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/files/bg-terms-of-reference-final-2-2.doc).
Wild fish are food security, protecting them is a global responsibility to the children of earth. Now that we one of the highest legal processes in Canada with us, we need work with it, keep it on track, make sure politicians know we are following this so I have several requests.
1. If there is something you think this Inquiry needs to examine please contact me and let me know. As I learn more I will let you know how you can do this directly to the Inquiry.
2. Even though we have this Inquiry underway, there is no excuse for the exemptions that salmon farmers enjoy under the Fisheries Act, we need every person who is interested to sign our letter to the Minister of Fisheries calling for enforcement of the Fisheries Act on salmon farms.
Last week a reporter discovered that when farm fish escape, the fish farmers refuse to put them back in the pens because they can no longer ensure custody of their product from egg to market. This shed significant light on the report that right after the recent escape of 40,000 farm salmon in Port Elizabeth a fisherman was not able to recapture the fish as they schooled around his seine boat. Instead, another boat was called and by the time it arrived it could only recapture 1,000. The company lamented it had lost 1 million dollars. This did not make sense until it became evident that if the first vessel had caught all 40,000 escaped salmon the company would have had the enormous task of disposing of them. Better perhaps to wait until there were only 1000 to deal with? Meanwhile Atlantic farm salmon began hitting commercial gillnets 40 km away in 24 hours as they dispersed into the Pacific.
Under the Fisheries Act it is against the law to release fish into the ocean, unless you have explicit permission to do so for enhancement purposes. Will there be a huge fine associated with this, escape and lack of recovery? Not unless we push for it.
So to all of you who write me daily asking what you can do. Please do everything you can to let people know they can join us in signing this letter to the Minister of Fisheries. Here is a flyer you can print and post (http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/files/salmon-farm-did-you-know.pdf) to sign the letter or donate to the legal fees www.adopt-a-fry.org
So once again thank you all! And here's to us and the work ahead.
Alexandra Morton
http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/
Sign letter to Canadian Minister of Fisheries asking for the laws of Canada to be Applied to fish farming (http://spreadsheets.google.com/viewform?hl=en&formkey=cEkxX3p3MGFBbWNVVGNVU3lxQnBwQmc6MA..)
On November 5, 2009 Prime Minister Harper stood in the House of Commons and announced there would be a Judicial Inquiry into the disappearance of 10 million Fraser sockeye. At that moment all of us became responsible for the future of wild fish in Canadian waters.
We are no longer on the outside. Thank you for the 100s of emails. Many of you are cautious about feeling any sense of hope and you are right. Many of you feel this success was due more to my work than to all of you and you are wrong. I could have written 500 more scientific papers, and blogged like a southeast storm to no avail. The Prime Minister responded because he could see the people of Canada demanded this.
The terms of this Judicial Inquiry are both specific and sweeping enough not only find out what killed our sockeye, but also to diagnose the sickness in Fisheries and Oceans Canada and prescribe a remedy to the benefit of all fisheries across Canada (http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/files/bg-terms-of-reference-final-2-2.doc).
Wild fish are food security, protecting them is a global responsibility to the children of earth. Now that we one of the highest legal processes in Canada with us, we need work with it, keep it on track, make sure politicians know we are following this so I have several requests.
1. If there is something you think this Inquiry needs to examine please contact me and let me know. As I learn more I will let you know how you can do this directly to the Inquiry.
2. Even though we have this Inquiry underway, there is no excuse for the exemptions that salmon farmers enjoy under the Fisheries Act, we need every person who is interested to sign our letter to the Minister of Fisheries calling for enforcement of the Fisheries Act on salmon farms.
Last week a reporter discovered that when farm fish escape, the fish farmers refuse to put them back in the pens because they can no longer ensure custody of their product from egg to market. This shed significant light on the report that right after the recent escape of 40,000 farm salmon in Port Elizabeth a fisherman was not able to recapture the fish as they schooled around his seine boat. Instead, another boat was called and by the time it arrived it could only recapture 1,000. The company lamented it had lost 1 million dollars. This did not make sense until it became evident that if the first vessel had caught all 40,000 escaped salmon the company would have had the enormous task of disposing of them. Better perhaps to wait until there were only 1000 to deal with? Meanwhile Atlantic farm salmon began hitting commercial gillnets 40 km away in 24 hours as they dispersed into the Pacific.
Under the Fisheries Act it is against the law to release fish into the ocean, unless you have explicit permission to do so for enhancement purposes. Will there be a huge fine associated with this, escape and lack of recovery? Not unless we push for it.
So to all of you who write me daily asking what you can do. Please do everything you can to let people know they can join us in signing this letter to the Minister of Fisheries. Here is a flyer you can print and post (http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/files/salmon-farm-did-you-know.pdf) to sign the letter or donate to the legal fees www.adopt-a-fry.org
So once again thank you all! And here's to us and the work ahead.
Alexandra Morton
Environmental Communications Options, 25th November 2009
BC Supreme Court will not delay KAFN salmon fishery class action law suit
British Columbia Supreme Court judgment means Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation (KAFN) salmon fishery class action law suit will not be delayed by provincial government efforts
(Vancouver, Nov. 25, 2009) In February 2009, representatives of the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation (KAFN) launched a Class Action law suit involving the B.C. Government's regulation of open net-cage salmon farms, and the very survival of B.C.'s wild salmon. On October 8th and 9th, a series of Motions were made by the B.C. Government with the potential to delay the case. A decision by the Honourable Mr. Justice Slade was rendered on November 20th dismissing the B.C. Government's Motions.
Responding to the decision, KAFN Chief and representative plaintiff in this action, Bob Chamberlin made the following observations, "We are pleased with the Court's response to the matters raised by the B.C. Government. The efforts of the B.C. Government had real potential to increase the damage to the salmon by delaying consideration of the merits of our case. It is a great relief, to be on track to seek Certification as a class action in early January 2010."
Included in the Honourable Mr. Justice Slade's judgment were the following statements:
Para 70: "In my view, there is a substantial risk that hearing the Province's preliminary motions in advance of the certification hearing could create unnecessary delay, duplication and expense. This does not mean that the Province is not able to advance their submissions in the appropriate forum, the certification hearing." and at Para. 74: "Issues over whether the plaintiff has satisfied the requirements of s. 4 [of the B.C. Class Proceedings Act] are not to be dealt with piecemeal in advance of the certification hearing. For the most part, the bases on which the Province seeks leave to apply to strike do just that."
In addition, Justice Slade clearly articulated the purpose of the class action at Para 66 and 67: "... As I understand it, the common issue, or perhaps issues, that the plaintiff seeks to try, is whether due to the licensing of fish farms, and Provincial regulation under its licensing scheme, wild salmon have become infested with sea lice, with a consequent reduction in wild salmon stocks. The common issues, thus framed, do not call for proof of an aboriginal right. The common issues are not, however, academic in relation to the rights asserted by the plaintiff, and possibly asserted by other Aboriginal Nations in the Broughton Archipelago. The object of the exercise of the asserted right is wild salmon. However the aboriginal rights of Aboriginal Nations located in the Broughton Archipelago may differ, there is nothing novel or controversial about the assertion that indigenous peoples of the British Columbia coast fished for salmon."
This law suit was filed to address the negative impacts of open net-cage salmon farming and the decline in the wild salmon population in their traditional territory. The suit was brought against the B.C. Government by a First Nation whose territory is within the area known as the Broughton Archipelago. This is the formerly salmon rich area of mainland coast, islands and bays east of the northern tip of Vancouver Island. Currently, 29 fish farms are authorized by the B.C. Government to operate in the area. The KAFN contends that these fish farms are licensed and regulated in a manner that has significant negative impacts on wild salmon stocks.
To schedule media interviews, please contact:
Don Huff, Penasi Communication/Environmental Communication Options
416-972-7404 or huffd(at)ecostrategy.ca
Copies of the Judgment can be found at: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/09/15/2009BCSC1593.htm
http://www.huffstrategy.com/MediaMa...y-KAFN-salmon-fishery-class-action-/1783.html
BC Supreme Court will not delay KAFN salmon fishery class action law suit
British Columbia Supreme Court judgment means Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation (KAFN) salmon fishery class action law suit will not be delayed by provincial government efforts
(Vancouver, Nov. 25, 2009) In February 2009, representatives of the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation (KAFN) launched a Class Action law suit involving the B.C. Government's regulation of open net-cage salmon farms, and the very survival of B.C.'s wild salmon. On October 8th and 9th, a series of Motions were made by the B.C. Government with the potential to delay the case. A decision by the Honourable Mr. Justice Slade was rendered on November 20th dismissing the B.C. Government's Motions.
Responding to the decision, KAFN Chief and representative plaintiff in this action, Bob Chamberlin made the following observations, "We are pleased with the Court's response to the matters raised by the B.C. Government. The efforts of the B.C. Government had real potential to increase the damage to the salmon by delaying consideration of the merits of our case. It is a great relief, to be on track to seek Certification as a class action in early January 2010."
Included in the Honourable Mr. Justice Slade's judgment were the following statements:
Para 70: "In my view, there is a substantial risk that hearing the Province's preliminary motions in advance of the certification hearing could create unnecessary delay, duplication and expense. This does not mean that the Province is not able to advance their submissions in the appropriate forum, the certification hearing." and at Para. 74: "Issues over whether the plaintiff has satisfied the requirements of s. 4 [of the B.C. Class Proceedings Act] are not to be dealt with piecemeal in advance of the certification hearing. For the most part, the bases on which the Province seeks leave to apply to strike do just that."
In addition, Justice Slade clearly articulated the purpose of the class action at Para 66 and 67: "... As I understand it, the common issue, or perhaps issues, that the plaintiff seeks to try, is whether due to the licensing of fish farms, and Provincial regulation under its licensing scheme, wild salmon have become infested with sea lice, with a consequent reduction in wild salmon stocks. The common issues, thus framed, do not call for proof of an aboriginal right. The common issues are not, however, academic in relation to the rights asserted by the plaintiff, and possibly asserted by other Aboriginal Nations in the Broughton Archipelago. The object of the exercise of the asserted right is wild salmon. However the aboriginal rights of Aboriginal Nations located in the Broughton Archipelago may differ, there is nothing novel or controversial about the assertion that indigenous peoples of the British Columbia coast fished for salmon."
This law suit was filed to address the negative impacts of open net-cage salmon farming and the decline in the wild salmon population in their traditional territory. The suit was brought against the B.C. Government by a First Nation whose territory is within the area known as the Broughton Archipelago. This is the formerly salmon rich area of mainland coast, islands and bays east of the northern tip of Vancouver Island. Currently, 29 fish farms are authorized by the B.C. Government to operate in the area. The KAFN contends that these fish farms are licensed and regulated in a manner that has significant negative impacts on wild salmon stocks.
To schedule media interviews, please contact:
Don Huff, Penasi Communication/Environmental Communication Options
416-972-7404 or huffd(at)ecostrategy.ca
Copies of the Judgment can be found at: http://www.courts.gov.bc.ca/jdb-txt/SC/09/15/2009BCSC1593.htm
http://www.huffstrategy.com/MediaMa...y-KAFN-salmon-fishery-class-action-/1783.html
Confusion over special licence and the 40,000 fish question
By Dan MacLennan
Special licences allowing fish farmers to fish for escaped Atlantic salmon were implemented to speed up recapture efforts, says a Department of Fisheries and Oceans manager.
But it appears confusion surrounding DFO licensing policy may have hindered efforts to recapture the 40,000 Atlantics that escaped Marine Harvest's Port Elizabeth farm last month. Reports say thousands of the escaped fish schooled just outside the fish farm pens for hours on Oct. 21 but the fish had largely dispersed by the time Marine Harvest brought a seiner up from Campbell River the following afternoon. Marine Harvest said another seiner already on scene was not asked to attempt recapture because it was not approved on the company's ZZA license. Less than 1,200 of the escaped fish were recaptured.
Andrew Thomson, DFO's Pacific Region director of aquaculture management, says the ZZA licence was created to allow companies to begin recapture immediately, without the need to contact DFO for permission to fish.
"(For) example, if there was an escape in the middle of the night, it's very difficult of course, to get a hold of somebody from Fisheries and Oceans to allow for a recapture fishery to occur," he said. "They have this licence in hand and can action a fishery without that permission because we've already pre-authorized it."
Thomson said the ZZA licence allows for one pre-authorized seine boat to fish within one nautical mile of the escape site, within 24 hours of the escape. The seiner must have a live brailling ability - the capacity to separate and release any wild fish that may be caught, known as 'by-catch'.
But he said regulations around recapture efforts are more flexible than some people, or fish farm companies might understand.
"We have the ability to issue a fishing permit as a special collection permit to allow recapture of fish, when requested to do so," he said. "The other thing we can do is upon request we can change the conditions of the ZZA, if Fisheries and Oceans feels there's not much chance of an impact to wild stocks and if the company that's applying thinks there's a reasonable chance for recapture of farm fish."
So Marine Harvest could have asked for a change in the conditions of its ZZA licence.
"Certainly, there is that mechanism to do so," Thomson said. "I'm not sure if the company understood that or not, but there is more flexibility in the system than maybe some people understand. In a case beyond the conditions of the ZZA licence, we do have to assess whether there's going to be an impact to wild stocks. That's our primary concern. Recapture is a good thing but we don't want to do it and impact a lot of wild stock."
On Monday, Marine Harvest's Clare Backman said he hadn't yet had a chance to talk to Thomson about that "so (I) really can't comment on that until we've had an opportunity to go through it with DFO.
"We've asked for some meetings in that regard so we're looking forward to going through all that with them," he told the Courier-Islander.
Thomson said DFO is open to improvements. "If there's better ways of getting at the problem without incurring an impact to wild resources, that's exactly what we want to be doing," he said.
The irony of the situation is not lost on biologist Alexandra Morton. She see's Marine Harvest's interpretation of the ZZA licence as a hindrance to the recapture of the Port Elizabeth escapees, while DFO describes the ZZA licence as a means to assist recapture efforts.
"Like every other experience I've had around salmon farms and Fisheries Act infractions, it's very confusing," she said. "Nobody really seems to know what's going on.
"My question again to Marine Harvest is did you really do your best to get these fish back or was it that you did not want them back? What I'm hearing right now is that Marine Harvest could have recovered these fish and did not. I really encourage DFO to investigate this and think about laying some charges because that is how you get people to comply with the law."
© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service
http://www.canada.com/Confusion+over+special+licence+fish+question/2262627/story.html
By Dan MacLennan
Special licences allowing fish farmers to fish for escaped Atlantic salmon were implemented to speed up recapture efforts, says a Department of Fisheries and Oceans manager.
But it appears confusion surrounding DFO licensing policy may have hindered efforts to recapture the 40,000 Atlantics that escaped Marine Harvest's Port Elizabeth farm last month. Reports say thousands of the escaped fish schooled just outside the fish farm pens for hours on Oct. 21 but the fish had largely dispersed by the time Marine Harvest brought a seiner up from Campbell River the following afternoon. Marine Harvest said another seiner already on scene was not asked to attempt recapture because it was not approved on the company's ZZA license. Less than 1,200 of the escaped fish were recaptured.
Andrew Thomson, DFO's Pacific Region director of aquaculture management, says the ZZA licence was created to allow companies to begin recapture immediately, without the need to contact DFO for permission to fish.
"(For) example, if there was an escape in the middle of the night, it's very difficult of course, to get a hold of somebody from Fisheries and Oceans to allow for a recapture fishery to occur," he said. "They have this licence in hand and can action a fishery without that permission because we've already pre-authorized it."
Thomson said the ZZA licence allows for one pre-authorized seine boat to fish within one nautical mile of the escape site, within 24 hours of the escape. The seiner must have a live brailling ability - the capacity to separate and release any wild fish that may be caught, known as 'by-catch'.
But he said regulations around recapture efforts are more flexible than some people, or fish farm companies might understand.
"We have the ability to issue a fishing permit as a special collection permit to allow recapture of fish, when requested to do so," he said. "The other thing we can do is upon request we can change the conditions of the ZZA, if Fisheries and Oceans feels there's not much chance of an impact to wild stocks and if the company that's applying thinks there's a reasonable chance for recapture of farm fish."
So Marine Harvest could have asked for a change in the conditions of its ZZA licence.
"Certainly, there is that mechanism to do so," Thomson said. "I'm not sure if the company understood that or not, but there is more flexibility in the system than maybe some people understand. In a case beyond the conditions of the ZZA licence, we do have to assess whether there's going to be an impact to wild stocks. That's our primary concern. Recapture is a good thing but we don't want to do it and impact a lot of wild stock."
On Monday, Marine Harvest's Clare Backman said he hadn't yet had a chance to talk to Thomson about that "so (I) really can't comment on that until we've had an opportunity to go through it with DFO.
"We've asked for some meetings in that regard so we're looking forward to going through all that with them," he told the Courier-Islander.
Thomson said DFO is open to improvements. "If there's better ways of getting at the problem without incurring an impact to wild resources, that's exactly what we want to be doing," he said.
The irony of the situation is not lost on biologist Alexandra Morton. She see's Marine Harvest's interpretation of the ZZA licence as a hindrance to the recapture of the Port Elizabeth escapees, while DFO describes the ZZA licence as a means to assist recapture efforts.
"Like every other experience I've had around salmon farms and Fisheries Act infractions, it's very confusing," she said. "Nobody really seems to know what's going on.
"My question again to Marine Harvest is did you really do your best to get these fish back or was it that you did not want them back? What I'm hearing right now is that Marine Harvest could have recovered these fish and did not. I really encourage DFO to investigate this and think about laying some charges because that is how you get people to comply with the law."
© Copyright (c) Canwest News Service
http://www.canada.com/Confusion+over+special+licence+fish+question/2262627/story.html
The Vancouver Sun, 18th November 2009
Fish being wiped out to feed farm animals, study says
Larry Pynn
The oceans are being emptied to provide feed for farmed animals such as fish, chickens and pigs, a study involving the University of B.C. concludes.
The study, published this week in Oryx: the International Journal of Conservation, finds that 30 million tonnes or 36 per cent of the world's total fisheries catch each year is ground up into fishmeal and oil to feed farmed animals.
The study notes pigs and chickens consume six and two times the amount of seafood as U.S. and Japanese consumers, respectively.
In Peru, the anchovy fishery produces half of the world fishmeal based on annual catches of five to 10 million tonnes, while 15 million people -- half the country's population -- live in poverty and 25 per cent of infants are malnourished.
Finding alternative sources for the production of animal feed should be a priority, the study said. Fisheries that supply the fishmeal industry instead of feeding people should not receive an eco-label of sustainability.
Protein alternatives for animal feed could potentially include soymeal as well as meals made from mass-producing insects, the study noted.
The study's lead author, Jennifer Jacquet, a post-doctoral fellow at UBC's Fisheries Centre, said in an interview Tuesday the B.C. salmon farming industry is a major consumer of wild fish stocks.
She doesn't see that changing because salmon -- unlike chickens -- are carnivores and unlikely to adapt to a herbivorous diet. Oyster and mussel farming is a better alternative, she said.
Mary Ellen Walling, executive director of the B.C. Salmon Farmers Association, deferred response to the Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance, but no one there could immediately be reached.
Garnet Etsell, a poultry producer and chair of the B.C. Agriculture Council, said he believes fishmeal and fish oil comprise only a small portion of poultry feed. He noted fish are added as a source of protein, just as bugs and worms would be consumed by wild chickens.
In the Oryx article, nine fisheries and conservation researchers, including four from UBC, also reviewed the effectiveness of conservation campaigns.
The Monterey Bay Aquarium has distributed more than one million seafood wallet cards advising consumers on sustainable seafood, but has found no overall change in the market. Fishing pressures have not decreased for targeted species.
Only about one per cent of fish sales are certified as sustainable by the London-based Marine Stewardship Council, which recently certified B.C.'s halibut and hake fisheries.
"Working with household consumers alone cannot save fish," the study concludes.
The Oryx study suggests campaigns targeting large supermarket chains would have more effect, noting more than 60 per cent of seafood in Canada and half the seafood in the U.S. is sold through supermarkets.
The authors also suggest establishing international standards for labelling sustainable seafood and eliminating harmful fisheries subsidies.
The study says that in general eco-labels "appear to be weak instruments for conservation and consumer campaigns do not seem effective at reducing demand or fishing pressure."
lpynn@vancouversun.com
http://www2.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f94debe7-131d-4277-8440-2d09105630c9
Fish being wiped out to feed farm animals, study says
Larry Pynn
The oceans are being emptied to provide feed for farmed animals such as fish, chickens and pigs, a study involving the University of B.C. concludes.
The study, published this week in Oryx: the International Journal of Conservation, finds that 30 million tonnes or 36 per cent of the world's total fisheries catch each year is ground up into fishmeal and oil to feed farmed animals.
The study notes pigs and chickens consume six and two times the amount of seafood as U.S. and Japanese consumers, respectively.
In Peru, the anchovy fishery produces half of the world fishmeal based on annual catches of five to 10 million tonnes, while 15 million people -- half the country's population -- live in poverty and 25 per cent of infants are malnourished.
Finding alternative sources for the production of animal feed should be a priority, the study said. Fisheries that supply the fishmeal industry instead of feeding people should not receive an eco-label of sustainability.
Protein alternatives for animal feed could potentially include soymeal as well as meals made from mass-producing insects, the study noted.
The study's lead author, Jennifer Jacquet, a post-doctoral fellow at UBC's Fisheries Centre, said in an interview Tuesday the B.C. salmon farming industry is a major consumer of wild fish stocks.
She doesn't see that changing because salmon -- unlike chickens -- are carnivores and unlikely to adapt to a herbivorous diet. Oyster and mussel farming is a better alternative, she said.
Mary Ellen Walling, executive director of the B.C. Salmon Farmers Association, deferred response to the Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance, but no one there could immediately be reached.
Garnet Etsell, a poultry producer and chair of the B.C. Agriculture Council, said he believes fishmeal and fish oil comprise only a small portion of poultry feed. He noted fish are added as a source of protein, just as bugs and worms would be consumed by wild chickens.
In the Oryx article, nine fisheries and conservation researchers, including four from UBC, also reviewed the effectiveness of conservation campaigns.
The Monterey Bay Aquarium has distributed more than one million seafood wallet cards advising consumers on sustainable seafood, but has found no overall change in the market. Fishing pressures have not decreased for targeted species.
Only about one per cent of fish sales are certified as sustainable by the London-based Marine Stewardship Council, which recently certified B.C.'s halibut and hake fisheries.
"Working with household consumers alone cannot save fish," the study concludes.
The Oryx study suggests campaigns targeting large supermarket chains would have more effect, noting more than 60 per cent of seafood in Canada and half the seafood in the U.S. is sold through supermarkets.
The authors also suggest establishing international standards for labelling sustainable seafood and eliminating harmful fisheries subsidies.
The study says that in general eco-labels "appear to be weak instruments for conservation and consumer campaigns do not seem effective at reducing demand or fishing pressure."
lpynn@vancouversun.com
http://www2.canada.com/vancouversun/news/story.html?id=f94debe7-131d-4277-8440-2d09105630c9
World Fishing Network, 16th November 2009
How Often Can We Screw Things Up
Darryl Choronzey
Over the years and I mean over many years, I've seen more than a few bureaucrats and biologists really screw up our Canadian sport fishery. Now don't get me wrong, not all bios and bureaucrats are deadheads, but trust me, more than a few of them out there have done a lot of harm to fish stocks, sport fishing and the economy. The problem is that a small majority of these so-called experts have too much power and too little knowledge to be put in charge of something as important my favorite pasttime. Hell, the ways some of these paper pushers are creating havoc with our fish stocks, there might not be fish around for my kids in the future let alone my grandkids.
I could tell you some real horror stories that have happened in the past and are even going on today here in Ontario, but the most worrisome screw-ups are taking place on British Columbia's Pacific coast. In fact, if drastic action is not taken immediately we could lose a major portion of our world famous West Coast salmon fishery.
By now, most of you have read the newspaper reports or seen the nightly news concerning the collapse of the Fraser River sockeye stocks. We're not talking a few fish here and there or a few small runs of fish up a few tributaries. No, what has happened over the past summer is the loss of tens of millions of sockeye and specific strains of fish that may never recover. So much concern has erupted over the disaster that Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been forced to call a judicial inquiry into the matter and hopefully the mismanagement being carried out by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
There's a lady on the West Coast, and a biologist by the way, by the name of Alexandra Morton, who has been warning for years that this catastrophe was going to happen... and now it has. In her studies, Morton (Adopt a Fry) has been warning that commercial salmon fish farming operations located in the protected waters of British Columbia's Inside Passage could be detrimental to wild salmon that migrate around and under the pens on their route to the northern Pacific. Her studies indicated that commercial operations were polluting and enriching the waters around the pens to the point that sea lice populations were expanding at an alarming rate. The sea lice in turn were attacking and killing the small sockeye smolt as they made their way by the pens.
I'm a believer in the work of Alexandra Morton and if she is correct our wild salmon stocks are in big, big trouble. Not just sockeye mind you, but sockeye, pink salmon, coho salmon, chinook salmon and more than likely just about anything and everything that co-exists around or near these pen operations.
Here are a couple of more sites (Calling From The Coast, Farmed Salmon Exposed) to check out and learn the sad story of just what is happening on the west coast of this country of ours.
It's obvious to me that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, especially on the west coast needs more than a Federal Judicial Inquiry. It needs a complete overall and heads need to roll. Not tomorrow, not next month, but immediately. That is if we want to have wild Pacific salmon in our fishing future at all.
http://www.wfn.tv/blog/Darryl/401363
How Often Can We Screw Things Up
Darryl Choronzey
Over the years and I mean over many years, I've seen more than a few bureaucrats and biologists really screw up our Canadian sport fishery. Now don't get me wrong, not all bios and bureaucrats are deadheads, but trust me, more than a few of them out there have done a lot of harm to fish stocks, sport fishing and the economy. The problem is that a small majority of these so-called experts have too much power and too little knowledge to be put in charge of something as important my favorite pasttime. Hell, the ways some of these paper pushers are creating havoc with our fish stocks, there might not be fish around for my kids in the future let alone my grandkids.
I could tell you some real horror stories that have happened in the past and are even going on today here in Ontario, but the most worrisome screw-ups are taking place on British Columbia's Pacific coast. In fact, if drastic action is not taken immediately we could lose a major portion of our world famous West Coast salmon fishery.
By now, most of you have read the newspaper reports or seen the nightly news concerning the collapse of the Fraser River sockeye stocks. We're not talking a few fish here and there or a few small runs of fish up a few tributaries. No, what has happened over the past summer is the loss of tens of millions of sockeye and specific strains of fish that may never recover. So much concern has erupted over the disaster that Prime Minister Stephen Harper has been forced to call a judicial inquiry into the matter and hopefully the mismanagement being carried out by the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
There's a lady on the West Coast, and a biologist by the way, by the name of Alexandra Morton, who has been warning for years that this catastrophe was going to happen... and now it has. In her studies, Morton (Adopt a Fry) has been warning that commercial salmon fish farming operations located in the protected waters of British Columbia's Inside Passage could be detrimental to wild salmon that migrate around and under the pens on their route to the northern Pacific. Her studies indicated that commercial operations were polluting and enriching the waters around the pens to the point that sea lice populations were expanding at an alarming rate. The sea lice in turn were attacking and killing the small sockeye smolt as they made their way by the pens.
I'm a believer in the work of Alexandra Morton and if she is correct our wild salmon stocks are in big, big trouble. Not just sockeye mind you, but sockeye, pink salmon, coho salmon, chinook salmon and more than likely just about anything and everything that co-exists around or near these pen operations.
Here are a couple of more sites (Calling From The Coast, Farmed Salmon Exposed) to check out and learn the sad story of just what is happening on the west coast of this country of ours.
It's obvious to me that the Department of Fisheries and Oceans, especially on the west coast needs more than a Federal Judicial Inquiry. It needs a complete overall and heads need to roll. Not tomorrow, not next month, but immediately. That is if we want to have wild Pacific salmon in our fishing future at all.
http://www.wfn.tv/blog/Darryl/401363
Global Study of Salmon Shows: 'Sustainable' Food Isn't So Sustainable
ScienceDaily (Nov. 24, 2009) — Popular thinking about how to improve food systems for the better often misses the point, according to the results of a three-year global study of salmon production systems. Rather than pushing for organic or land-based production, or worrying about simple metrics such as "food miles," the study finds that the world can achieve greater environmental benefits by focusing on improvements to key aspects of production and distribution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also:
Plants & Animals
Fish
Agriculture and Food
Earth & Climate
Sustainability
Environmental Issues
Science & Society
Environmental Policies
Resource Shortage
Reference
Fish migration
Atlantic salmon
Fish farming
Salmon
For example, what farmed salmon are fed, how wild salmon are caught and the choice to buy frozen over fresh matters more than organic vs. conventional or wild vs. farmed when considering global scale environmental impacts such as climate change, ozone depletion, loss of critical habitat, and ocean acidification.
The study is the world's first comprehensive global-scale look at a major food commodity from a full life cycle perspective, and the researchers examined everything -- how salmon are caught in the wild, what they're fed when farmed, how they're transported, how they're consumed, and how all of this contributes to both environmental degradation and socioeconomic benefits.
The researchers behind the study sought to understand how the world can develop truly sustainable food systems through the lens of understanding the complexities associated with wild and farmed salmon production, processing and distribution. They found that decision-making for food must learn to fully account for the life cycle socioeconomic and environmental costs of food production. How we weight the importance of such impacts is ultimately subjective and in the realm of policy and culture, but using a comprehensive approach provides a more nuanced process for informed decision-making. Even food has a lifecycle, and the world must learn to comprehend the full costs of it in order to design reliable, resilient food systems to feed a world population that's forecast to grow to 9 billion in less than 40 years.
The researchers chose salmon as their focus as it exemplifies important characteristics of modern food systems, yet offers unique opportunities for comparison. It is available around the world at any time and in any location, regardless of season or local ecosystem, it is available in numerous product forms, and it is distributed using a variety of transport modes. Unlike many other food systems, however, it is available from both wild sources and a range of farmed production systems.
While it isn't easy to balance people, profit and planet, the world must do much better. Food production, in aggregate, is the single largest source of environmental degradation globally. Impacts vary dramatically depending on what, where and how food is produced. For example, early results of the study found that growing salmon in land-based farms can increase total greenhouse gas emissions ten-fold over conventional farming depending on how and where the farming is conducted. Similarly, while organic farming of many crops offers benefits over conventional production, organic salmon production gives rise to impacts very similar to conventional farming due to the use of resource intensive fish meals and oils. Beyond the farm, it's important to also consider the total impact of food preparation. Driving to the store alone and then cooking alone at home has a big environmental impact. Going out to dinner more, or just eating more frequently with friends and family at home, has huge benefit.
For concerned consumers, it's important to think about how food was produced and transported -- not just where it was produced -- when making food choices.
Initial Findings from the Study (More Due with the Final Report in 2010):
Fish should swim, not fly. Air-freighting salmon, and any food, results in substantial increases in environmental impacts. If more frozen food were consumed, more container ships would be used to ship food. Container ships are by far the most efficient and carbon-friendly way to transport food. Globally, the majority of salmon fillets are currently consumed fresh and never frozen. In fish-loving Japan, which gets much of its fish by air, switching to 75 percent frozen salmon would have more benefit than all of Europe eating locally farmed salmon.
The choice to buy frozen matters more than organic vs. conventional or wild vs. farmed.
A full life cycle assessment approach to research provides a more nuanced process for informed decision-making. Even food has a lifecycle, and we must comprehend the full impact to make meaningful improvements to food systems. Tradeoffs may be inevitable.
Contrary to what is widely perceived, the vast majority of broad-scale resource use and environmental impacts (energy inputs, GHG emissions, etc) from conventional salmon farming result from the feeds used to produce them. What happens at or around a farm site may be important for local ecological reasons but contributes very little to global scale concerns such as global warming.
[8)]Across the globe, what is used to feed salmon and the amounts of feeds used vary widely. As a result, impacts are very different. Norwegian salmon farming resulted in generally lower overall impacts while farmed salmon production in the UK resulted in the greatest impacts.
Reducing the amount of animal-derived inputs to feeds (e.g. fish meals and oils along with livestock derived meals) in favor of plant-based feed inputs can markedly reduce environmental impacts.
Growing organic salmon using fish meals and oils from very resource intensive fisheries results in impacts very similar to conventional farmed salmon production.
If not planned carefully, technological fixes aimed at addressing local environmental challenges associated with conventional salmon farming can result in substantial increases in global-scale environmental impacts. In general, salmon fisheries result in relatively low global-scale environmental impacts. However, substantial differences exist between how salmon are caught. Catching salmon in large nets as they school together has one tenth the impact of catching them in small numbers using baited hooks and lures.
Across salmon production systems -- and all food systems -- the world is often swimming against the tide. Instead of working with nature, people work against it, chasing fish in the open ocean with big diesel engines or substituting energy demanding pumping and water treatment for free ecosystem services in salmon farming. We can and must do better than this and start to swim with the tide.
Email or share this story:| More
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Story Source:
Adapted from materials provided by Ecotrust.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Journal Reference:
Pelletier et al. Not All Salmon Are Created Equal: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Global Salmon Farming Systems. Environmental Science & Technology, 2009; 091023132156037 DOI: 10.1021/es9010114
Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:
APA
MLA Ecotrust (2009, November 24). Global study of salmon shows: 'Sustainable' food isn't so sustainable. ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 25, 2009, from http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2009/11/091124152803.htm
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
A commercial salmon and ocean trout farm in Macquarie Harbour, West Coast, Tasmania, Australia. What farmed salmon are fed, how wild salmon are caught and the choice to buy frozen over fresh matters more than organic vs. conventional or wild vs. farmed when considering global scale environmental impacts such as climate change, ozone depletion, loss of critical habitat, and ocean acidification. (Credit: iStockphoto)
ScienceDaily (Nov. 24, 2009) — Popular thinking about how to improve food systems for the better often misses the point, according to the results of a three-year global study of salmon production systems. Rather than pushing for organic or land-based production, or worrying about simple metrics such as "food miles," the study finds that the world can achieve greater environmental benefits by focusing on improvements to key aspects of production and distribution.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also:
Plants & Animals
Fish
Agriculture and Food
Earth & Climate
Sustainability
Environmental Issues
Science & Society
Environmental Policies
Resource Shortage
Reference
Fish migration
Atlantic salmon
Fish farming
Salmon
For example, what farmed salmon are fed, how wild salmon are caught and the choice to buy frozen over fresh matters more than organic vs. conventional or wild vs. farmed when considering global scale environmental impacts such as climate change, ozone depletion, loss of critical habitat, and ocean acidification.
The study is the world's first comprehensive global-scale look at a major food commodity from a full life cycle perspective, and the researchers examined everything -- how salmon are caught in the wild, what they're fed when farmed, how they're transported, how they're consumed, and how all of this contributes to both environmental degradation and socioeconomic benefits.
The researchers behind the study sought to understand how the world can develop truly sustainable food systems through the lens of understanding the complexities associated with wild and farmed salmon production, processing and distribution. They found that decision-making for food must learn to fully account for the life cycle socioeconomic and environmental costs of food production. How we weight the importance of such impacts is ultimately subjective and in the realm of policy and culture, but using a comprehensive approach provides a more nuanced process for informed decision-making. Even food has a lifecycle, and the world must learn to comprehend the full costs of it in order to design reliable, resilient food systems to feed a world population that's forecast to grow to 9 billion in less than 40 years.
The researchers chose salmon as their focus as it exemplifies important characteristics of modern food systems, yet offers unique opportunities for comparison. It is available around the world at any time and in any location, regardless of season or local ecosystem, it is available in numerous product forms, and it is distributed using a variety of transport modes. Unlike many other food systems, however, it is available from both wild sources and a range of farmed production systems.
While it isn't easy to balance people, profit and planet, the world must do much better. Food production, in aggregate, is the single largest source of environmental degradation globally. Impacts vary dramatically depending on what, where and how food is produced. For example, early results of the study found that growing salmon in land-based farms can increase total greenhouse gas emissions ten-fold over conventional farming depending on how and where the farming is conducted. Similarly, while organic farming of many crops offers benefits over conventional production, organic salmon production gives rise to impacts very similar to conventional farming due to the use of resource intensive fish meals and oils. Beyond the farm, it's important to also consider the total impact of food preparation. Driving to the store alone and then cooking alone at home has a big environmental impact. Going out to dinner more, or just eating more frequently with friends and family at home, has huge benefit.
For concerned consumers, it's important to think about how food was produced and transported -- not just where it was produced -- when making food choices.
Initial Findings from the Study (More Due with the Final Report in 2010):
Fish should swim, not fly. Air-freighting salmon, and any food, results in substantial increases in environmental impacts. If more frozen food were consumed, more container ships would be used to ship food. Container ships are by far the most efficient and carbon-friendly way to transport food. Globally, the majority of salmon fillets are currently consumed fresh and never frozen. In fish-loving Japan, which gets much of its fish by air, switching to 75 percent frozen salmon would have more benefit than all of Europe eating locally farmed salmon. The choice to buy frozen matters more than organic vs. conventional or wild vs. farmed. A full life cycle assessment approach to research provides a more nuanced process for informed decision-making. Even food has a lifecycle, and we must comprehend the full impact to make meaningful improvements to food systems. Tradeoffs may be inevitable. Contrary to what is widely perceived, the vast majority of broad-scale resource use and environmental impacts (energy inputs, GHG emissions, etc) from conventional salmon farming result from the feeds used to produce them. What happens at or around a farm site may be important for local ecological reasons but contributes very little to global scale concerns such as global warming. [8)]Across the globe, what is used to feed salmon and the amounts of feeds used vary widely. As a result, impacts are very different. Norwegian salmon farming resulted in generally lower overall impacts while farmed salmon production in the UK resulted in the greatest impacts.
Reducing the amount of animal-derived inputs to feeds (e.g. fish meals and oils along with livestock derived meals) in favor of plant-based feed inputs can markedly reduce environmental impacts. Growing organic salmon using fish meals and oils from very resource intensive fisheries results in impacts very similar to conventional farmed salmon production. If not planned carefully, technological fixes aimed at addressing local environmental challenges associated with conventional salmon farming can result in substantial increases in global-scale environmental impacts. In general, salmon fisheries result in relatively low global-scale environmental impacts. However, substantial differences exist between how salmon are caught. Catching salmon in large nets as they school together has one tenth the impact of catching them in small numbers using baited hooks and lures. Across salmon production systems -- and all food systems -- the world is often swimming against the tide. Instead of working with nature, people work against it, chasing fish in the open ocean with big diesel engines or substituting energy demanding pumping and water treatment for free ecosystem services in salmon farming. We can and must do better than this and start to swim with the tide.Email or share this story:| More
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Story Source:
Adapted from materials provided by Ecotrust.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Journal Reference:
Pelletier et al. Not All Salmon Are Created Equal: Life Cycle Assessment (LCA) of Global Salmon Farming Systems. Environmental Science & Technology, 2009; 091023132156037 DOI: 10.1021/es9010114
Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:
APA
MLA Ecotrust (2009, November 24). Global study of salmon shows: 'Sustainable' food isn't so sustainable. ScienceDaily. Retrieved November 25, 2009, from http://www.sciencedaily.com /releases/2009/11/091124152803.htm
Note: If no author is given, the source is cited instead.
A commercial salmon and ocean trout farm in Macquarie Harbour, West Coast, Tasmania, Australia. What farmed salmon are fed, how wild salmon are caught and the choice to buy frozen over fresh matters more than organic vs. conventional or wild vs. farmed when considering global scale environmental impacts such as climate change, ozone depletion, loss of critical habitat, and ocean acidification. (Credit: iStockphoto)
S
sockeyefry
Guest
Hey Agent,
Some good info there. I don't think the blog by Darrell is really a credible article, cause his claim to fame is a TV show host in Ontario, but the other ones were quite good.
If the sustainablility of salmon farms is less dependent on local practises and more dependent on the feed source, then would this not be applicable to all farmed activities which use fish meal such as Chickens and Pigs?
It was interesting to note the fish don't fly bit. Alaska is quite proud of its cargo planes which ship fresh salmon southward. The bulk of Chilean product going to the US is ofcourse flown, but anything sold to Japan usually goes frozen. BC of course trucks 100% of its product to the States.
Looks like the El Nino will be having a large impact on the peruvian anchovy fishery. Supply could be down as much as 30%. Fish feed companies have already spent millions and many years of research on replacing the fish products in the diets, and have already replaced over half the fish products compared to the old diets.
Some good info there. I don't think the blog by Darrell is really a credible article, cause his claim to fame is a TV show host in Ontario, but the other ones were quite good.
If the sustainablility of salmon farms is less dependent on local practises and more dependent on the feed source, then would this not be applicable to all farmed activities which use fish meal such as Chickens and Pigs?
It was interesting to note the fish don't fly bit. Alaska is quite proud of its cargo planes which ship fresh salmon southward. The bulk of Chilean product going to the US is ofcourse flown, but anything sold to Japan usually goes frozen. BC of course trucks 100% of its product to the States.
Looks like the El Nino will be having a large impact on the peruvian anchovy fishery. Supply could be down as much as 30%. Fish feed companies have already spent millions and many years of research on replacing the fish products in the diets, and have already replaced over half the fish products compared to the old diets.
The Coast, 26th November 2009
Suffering Salmon
Stephen Harper has called for a judicial inquiry into the west coast salmon collapse, but will it be enough to save the fish?
by Chris Benjamin
In 1992, 95 percent of Atlantic cod disappeared. Our fisheries collapsed, and with a major ocean predator gone, an entire ecosystem was out of whack. Now scientists say the European cod stocks are collapsing.
Thank god for pollock. Oh wait, their stocks remain depleted. OK, haddock? Some stocks stable, some uncertain, some shut down for "rebuilding." Atlantic halibut? Improving, but data is scarce.
And salmon? Fuggedaboutit.
Out west, scientists are baffled---or in the case of government scientists, completely disinterested---by the disappearing sockeye salmon in the Fraser River. In all, 10 million fewer salmon have returned to spawn this year. At this rate, BC pink salmon will be extinct by 2015.
Strangely, while the sockeye that migrated north out of the Fraser disappeared, the ones that migrated south did better than expected. Renowned biologist Alexandra Morton's theory is that salmon farms are killing the wild salmon.
"The salmon that go north and have a 90 percent failure rate, encounter 60 salmon farm sites on their route," she explains. "The ones that go south, and come back at four times the rate of DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans) predictions, encounter zero farms."
The fish are on the upswing of their natural population cycle, hence the success of the southbound farm-free sockeye. The return rates for the sockeye are enormous in farm-free waters through the Pacific.
Given the way salmon farms operate, Morton's theory makes sense. They use Atlantic salmon in the Pacific, pump them full of drugs and chemicals and raid the Pacific for fish food like herring and sable fish, which could have otherwise been eaten by wild fish.
Despite the drugs and pesticides, penning wild, predatory, migratory fish creates a breeding ground for parasites and disease. Sea lice in particular thrive in the bright lights of fish farms, growing and reproducing like rabbits on 'roids. And all the salmon poop lands on the ocean floor, where it creates toxic algae blooms hundreds of feet deep. The wild salmon farms are placed smack dab in the middle of migration routes.
Not all aquaculture is so unsustainable. Some shellfish farms may actually benefit ocean ecosystems. But, as Morton says, "Growing a carnivore is not good for the ocean."
Morton has found some corroborating evidence for her theory in the form of sea lice on the sockeye, a malady common in farmed salmon. But further study is needed. According to Morton, "DFO has thwarted progress with a torrent of highly contradictory and confusing misinformation."
Morton and other scientists have been pushing for an inquiry into DFO practices for years. "If there had been a judicial inquiry into DFO's management of our North Atlantic cod stocks," she says, "certain DFO scientists would have been allowed to speak earlier and we would still have those fish stocks."
Last week, Morton got her wish. In possibly the only positive environmental move he's made aside from repressing a fart, prime minister Stephen Harper announced that there will be a judicial inquiry into DFO management of the Fraser River sockeye. The last time anyone took an official look at fisheries management was in a royal commission of 1928.
"It's an amazing step," says Shannon Arnold, Ecology Action Centre's marine coordinator. "I hope it is just a precursor to delving into the utter lack of accountability of fisheries management in Canada, the political decision-making and mismanagement that has led to a crisis in our oceans and fishing communities."
DFO has been screwing up the fisheries on both coasts for decades, setting quotas too high, suppressing scientific findings, refusing to enforce existing rules or regulate emerging industries like fish farming and generally favouring the greedy palms of multinational fishing giants over the calloused hands of traditional fishermen.
If the truth doesn't come out the salmon will be the second domino (cod being the first) in a long series of big fish extinctions. Morton urges Nova Scotians to take a closer look at our fish farms. "We need to band together on both coasts," she says.
When the community of Port Mouton Bay on the south shore did just that, they found a layer of salmon poop covering the ocean floor, polluting the bay and threatening the lobster catch. They fought a newer, bigger fish farm proposal and convinced the province to put an indefinite moratorium on fish farming in the area.
Sadly, though, we've taken the problem as a solution. In the face of collapsing fisheries we've consumed nine percent more farmed fish every year since 1985. The industry is projected to triple in coming years. Let the dominoes fall where they may.
http://www.thecoast.ca/halifax/suffering-salmon/Content?oid=1415405
Suffering Salmon
Stephen Harper has called for a judicial inquiry into the west coast salmon collapse, but will it be enough to save the fish?
by Chris Benjamin
In 1992, 95 percent of Atlantic cod disappeared. Our fisheries collapsed, and with a major ocean predator gone, an entire ecosystem was out of whack. Now scientists say the European cod stocks are collapsing.
Thank god for pollock. Oh wait, their stocks remain depleted. OK, haddock? Some stocks stable, some uncertain, some shut down for "rebuilding." Atlantic halibut? Improving, but data is scarce.
And salmon? Fuggedaboutit.
Out west, scientists are baffled---or in the case of government scientists, completely disinterested---by the disappearing sockeye salmon in the Fraser River. In all, 10 million fewer salmon have returned to spawn this year. At this rate, BC pink salmon will be extinct by 2015.
Strangely, while the sockeye that migrated north out of the Fraser disappeared, the ones that migrated south did better than expected. Renowned biologist Alexandra Morton's theory is that salmon farms are killing the wild salmon.
"The salmon that go north and have a 90 percent failure rate, encounter 60 salmon farm sites on their route," she explains. "The ones that go south, and come back at four times the rate of DFO (Department of Fisheries and Oceans) predictions, encounter zero farms."
The fish are on the upswing of their natural population cycle, hence the success of the southbound farm-free sockeye. The return rates for the sockeye are enormous in farm-free waters through the Pacific.
Given the way salmon farms operate, Morton's theory makes sense. They use Atlantic salmon in the Pacific, pump them full of drugs and chemicals and raid the Pacific for fish food like herring and sable fish, which could have otherwise been eaten by wild fish.
Despite the drugs and pesticides, penning wild, predatory, migratory fish creates a breeding ground for parasites and disease. Sea lice in particular thrive in the bright lights of fish farms, growing and reproducing like rabbits on 'roids. And all the salmon poop lands on the ocean floor, where it creates toxic algae blooms hundreds of feet deep. The wild salmon farms are placed smack dab in the middle of migration routes.
Not all aquaculture is so unsustainable. Some shellfish farms may actually benefit ocean ecosystems. But, as Morton says, "Growing a carnivore is not good for the ocean."
Morton has found some corroborating evidence for her theory in the form of sea lice on the sockeye, a malady common in farmed salmon. But further study is needed. According to Morton, "DFO has thwarted progress with a torrent of highly contradictory and confusing misinformation."
Morton and other scientists have been pushing for an inquiry into DFO practices for years. "If there had been a judicial inquiry into DFO's management of our North Atlantic cod stocks," she says, "certain DFO scientists would have been allowed to speak earlier and we would still have those fish stocks."
Last week, Morton got her wish. In possibly the only positive environmental move he's made aside from repressing a fart, prime minister Stephen Harper announced that there will be a judicial inquiry into DFO management of the Fraser River sockeye. The last time anyone took an official look at fisheries management was in a royal commission of 1928.
"It's an amazing step," says Shannon Arnold, Ecology Action Centre's marine coordinator. "I hope it is just a precursor to delving into the utter lack of accountability of fisheries management in Canada, the political decision-making and mismanagement that has led to a crisis in our oceans and fishing communities."
DFO has been screwing up the fisheries on both coasts for decades, setting quotas too high, suppressing scientific findings, refusing to enforce existing rules or regulate emerging industries like fish farming and generally favouring the greedy palms of multinational fishing giants over the calloused hands of traditional fishermen.
If the truth doesn't come out the salmon will be the second domino (cod being the first) in a long series of big fish extinctions. Morton urges Nova Scotians to take a closer look at our fish farms. "We need to band together on both coasts," she says.
When the community of Port Mouton Bay on the south shore did just that, they found a layer of salmon poop covering the ocean floor, polluting the bay and threatening the lobster catch. They fought a newer, bigger fish farm proposal and convinced the province to put an indefinite moratorium on fish farming in the area.
Sadly, though, we've taken the problem as a solution. In the face of collapsing fisheries we've consumed nine percent more farmed fish every year since 1985. The industry is projected to triple in coming years. Let the dominoes fall where they may.
http://www.thecoast.ca/halifax/suffering-salmon/Content?oid=1415405
Paying Attention by Paul Willcocks, 23rd November 2009
Salmon farm class-action suit survives a B.C. challenge
It's tough to keep up with all the action on the salmon farm issue, but the proposed class-action suit by the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation is worth watching.
The First Nation is asserting fishing rights in the Broughton Archipelago. And it's arguing the provincial government is hurting the interests of members by allowing salmon farms, which it says hurt wild salmon stocks.
There is a long way to go before the court approves the class action suit, let alone delivers a judgment on the issue.
But the province lost a preliminary bid to have the suit tossed in a B.C. Supreme Court ruling here.
The judgment notes the supporting materials for the bid to certify a class action include an affadavit from Fred Whoriskey, who will provide evidence for the First Nation.
The name might be familiar. In 2007, the government appointed Bill Smart, the special prosecutor in the Glen Clark case, to act as a special prosecutor on a file involving allegations that sea lice from salmon farms were damaging wild stocks. Smart concluded the farms were likely damaging wild stocks. He recommended against proceeding because it was unclear if their actions were against the law. His key expert was, yes, Fred Whoriskey. You can read more in these two columns from 2007.
By the by, I highly recommended the Recent Judgments section of the B.C. Superior Courts website. Judgments from the B.C. Supreme Court of Appeal are posted almost daily. Browsing them offers a direct view of the justice system - you'll marvel at how much of the courts' time is taken with divorces and insurance claims - and a lot of useful bits of information. (I learned, for example, that a paramedic injured in a crash estimated his continuing income, with overtime, would have been over $100,000 a year.)
You'll also be impressed, I think, with how sensible the judgments are in criminal cases.
http://willcocks.blogspot.com/2009/11/salmon-farm-class-action-suit-survives.html
Salmon farm class-action suit survives a B.C. challenge
It's tough to keep up with all the action on the salmon farm issue, but the proposed class-action suit by the Kwicksutaineuk/Ah-Kwa-Mish First Nation is worth watching.
The First Nation is asserting fishing rights in the Broughton Archipelago. And it's arguing the provincial government is hurting the interests of members by allowing salmon farms, which it says hurt wild salmon stocks.
There is a long way to go before the court approves the class action suit, let alone delivers a judgment on the issue.
But the province lost a preliminary bid to have the suit tossed in a B.C. Supreme Court ruling here.
The judgment notes the supporting materials for the bid to certify a class action include an affadavit from Fred Whoriskey, who will provide evidence for the First Nation.
The name might be familiar. In 2007, the government appointed Bill Smart, the special prosecutor in the Glen Clark case, to act as a special prosecutor on a file involving allegations that sea lice from salmon farms were damaging wild stocks. Smart concluded the farms were likely damaging wild stocks. He recommended against proceeding because it was unclear if their actions were against the law. His key expert was, yes, Fred Whoriskey. You can read more in these two columns from 2007.
By the by, I highly recommended the Recent Judgments section of the B.C. Superior Courts website. Judgments from the B.C. Supreme Court of Appeal are posted almost daily. Browsing them offers a direct view of the justice system - you'll marvel at how much of the courts' time is taken with divorces and insurance claims - and a lot of useful bits of information. (I learned, for example, that a paramedic injured in a crash estimated his continuing income, with overtime, would have been over $100,000 a year.)
You'll also be impressed, I think, with how sensible the judgments are in criminal cases.
http://willcocks.blogspot.com/2009/11/salmon-farm-class-action-suit-survives.html
The Times, 20th November 2009
Feds show some guts with fish
Finally a Canadian prime minister is doing what none of his predecessors had the guts to do: Ask why Fraser River sockeye are going the way of the Atlantic cod, leaving Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows residents who earn a living on the river in the cold.
Conservative MP John Cummins of Delta-Richmond East -- never one to hold back criticism of Canada's fisheries policies, even when it's his own government at the helm -- heaped praise on Stephen Harper for his recent "gutsy" decision to order a judicial inquiry into the collapse of the Fraser River sockeye.
Cummins himself deserves considerable credit. He has been working behind the scenes in Ottawa to make this inquiry a reality.
If critics are right, Department of Fisheries and Oceans bureaucrats have been ignoring the warnings of their own scientists and managers for years. And that has meant millions of fish disappearing.
It is widely believed that some have been muzzled. It will be interesting to see what they have to say when those muzzles come off.
Cummins told TIMES sister paper the Richmond News that he feels that senior fisheries managers are often hesitant to take action that will be unpopular or politically incorrect. He hopes the findings of an inquiry frees them to make those tough decisions.
One thing that many stakeholders hope will come from this inquiry is a recognition of the inherent conflict of interest DFO is in with respect to being responsible for both the wild and farmed salmon sectors.
We can expect the B.C. Salmon Farmers Association to be out in full force with their own studies refuting the meagre science available on the effects of fish farms on wild salmon.
It is meagre because it seems that most of it has been left to one independent researcher, Alexandra Morton.
It appears DFO hasn't done any serious science here. If it has, it hasn't done much to publicize it.
And that's one question we'd like answered at this inquiry -- why not?
http://www2.canada.com/mapleridgeti....html?id=ed7edae5-14ff-42b3-b43f-8cf89ff8b89c
Feds show some guts with fish
Finally a Canadian prime minister is doing what none of his predecessors had the guts to do: Ask why Fraser River sockeye are going the way of the Atlantic cod, leaving Maple Ridge and Pitt Meadows residents who earn a living on the river in the cold.
Conservative MP John Cummins of Delta-Richmond East -- never one to hold back criticism of Canada's fisheries policies, even when it's his own government at the helm -- heaped praise on Stephen Harper for his recent "gutsy" decision to order a judicial inquiry into the collapse of the Fraser River sockeye.
Cummins himself deserves considerable credit. He has been working behind the scenes in Ottawa to make this inquiry a reality.
If critics are right, Department of Fisheries and Oceans bureaucrats have been ignoring the warnings of their own scientists and managers for years. And that has meant millions of fish disappearing.
It is widely believed that some have been muzzled. It will be interesting to see what they have to say when those muzzles come off.
Cummins told TIMES sister paper the Richmond News that he feels that senior fisheries managers are often hesitant to take action that will be unpopular or politically incorrect. He hopes the findings of an inquiry frees them to make those tough decisions.
One thing that many stakeholders hope will come from this inquiry is a recognition of the inherent conflict of interest DFO is in with respect to being responsible for both the wild and farmed salmon sectors.
We can expect the B.C. Salmon Farmers Association to be out in full force with their own studies refuting the meagre science available on the effects of fish farms on wild salmon.
It is meagre because it seems that most of it has been left to one independent researcher, Alexandra Morton.
It appears DFO hasn't done any serious science here. If it has, it hasn't done much to publicize it.
And that's one question we'd like answered at this inquiry -- why not?
http://www2.canada.com/mapleridgeti....html?id=ed7edae5-14ff-42b3-b43f-8cf89ff8b89c
November 30, 2009
Minister Gail Shea
Ottawa, Canada
Dear Minister Shea:
Twenty thousand, two hundred forty-three (*20,243*) people have now signed the
letter on my website www.adopt-a-fry.org <http://www.adopt-a-fry.org> insisting
that you apply the /Fisheries Act/ to “farming” salmon.
But the Norwegian salmon farming industry is now so far out of alignment with
common sense and the spirit of Canadian law that the road to compliance is not
simple. As you prepare to assume control of this industry as per the BC Supreme
Court decision we, the public, are doing your job in your absence laying charges
against this industry and removing the firewalls to protect our fish.
Twenty years ago the business of raising salmon was wrongly categorized as
“farming” and assigned to the Province to manage. The Province is not
responsible for wild fish and the feds were not responsible for fish farms, so
no one has been responsible for impact of salmon “farms” on wild fish.
This Provincial regulatory scheme was recognized as unlawful and struck down by
Judge Hinkson, February 2009. He gave government 1 year to sort this out and it
remains uncertain if ownership of salmon (farmed or not) is even legal in the
ocean.
At first it was assumed the Provincial government would somehow continue to run
the industry, but shortly after the August 2009 sockeye crash, the Province
backed away leaving /Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) /scrambling to design a
regulatory regime. As a result a delay is being negotiated during which the
Province expects to continue expanding the industry!
Expansion is crucial to Norwegian fish farmers because they have lost money for
3 years now and their share prices can only rise if they put more fish in the
water. However, we just lost 10 million sockeye that passed through heavily fish
farmed waters and Judge Cohen has “aquaculture” 3rd on his list to investigate
with his Judicial Inquiry. It would be immoral to expand the industry during
this moment of regulatory restructuring and investigation.
When you peel back the layers of the /Fisheries Act/ the conflicting rules make
no sense, except as firewalls. On the one hand the /Pacific (Fishery)
Regulations (1993/) exempts Provincially licenced aquaculture from /all /fishing
regulations appearing to give them unrestricted access to all the wild fish
drawn into their pens by the lights and food. These fish are Atlantic salmon
fodder and highly valuable sablefish, salmon and herring.
Then as if someone recognized the preposterous enormity of this the /Access to
Wild Aquatic Resources 2004/ was produced to licence fish farmers for by-catch,
if the amount was deemed insignificant to wild stocks.
This was a good idea, but no one seems to have these licences. And how could
they? The wild pink salmon Marine Harvest admitted to having in their boat last
June 16 were from an age-class and stock so endangered millions of public
dollars were spent to protect them. However, this is lost in DFO’s regulatory
labyrinth. If Marine Harvest has no licence to possess by-catch, does that mean
that the 1993 regulations come into effect to exempt them from all fishing rules
including possession of an endangered wild fish stock? I hope we get to find
out. Judge Saunderson issued a summons to Marine Harvest to appear in court for
possessing these pink salmon. The Department of Justice could halt this case,
but it would seem in the public interest for a court to hear this.
In October 2009 Marine Harvest also admitted to catching herring in the
Broughton Archipelago and composting them with no reporting or licence. Was this
legal or illegal? Does anyone know? If they had no licence for tons of herring
by-catch are they exempt?
Herring fishing has been closed in Broughton for twenty years because the stocks
are not rebuilding. Now we find out Norwegian “farmers” are killing them despite
the closure with no apparent ramifications, no quota nor reporting. These fish
farmers are out-fishing BC fishermen! Over-fishing is a global scourge.
Minister Shea this is not right.
Nothing is straightforward. When 40,000 Atlantics escaped from Marine Harvest’s
farm October 21, 2009, we were told they were worth a million dollars and
everything had been done to recover them. But now we hear farm fish are
worthless once they escape and only 1,200 were recovered because Marine Harvest
was “confused” about the licence DFO granted them specifically for this
situation. Does profit - starved Marine Harvest really want the expense of
disposing of 40,000 fish? They did not do everything they could have to
recapture their fish and section 55 of the /Fishery (General Regulations)/
states no person shall release live fish into fish habitat. They must be charged
and heavily fined to inspire compliance. This is the tool your Ministry uses on
other fishermen.
It is disturbing that someone lobbied Parliament to disguise the industry as
Provincial farms even though this must have raised legal red flags and then
someone specifically exempted “provincial aquaculture” from the fishing
regulations. This is Salmongate.
We are hosting guests who are pulling the tablecloth into their laps dragging
the silverware, the food, the water /everything/ out of our reach. Thankfully,
Judges Hinkson, Slade, Cohen and Saunderson have nailed the tablecloth to the
table.
However it is not up to the courts to manage fish. /Fisheries and Oceans Canada
/is touring the _National Aquaculture Strategic Action Plan Initiative_ to get
feedback, calling aquaculture a legitimate user of Canadian marine waters.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/lib-bib/nasapi-insapa/nasapi-inpasa-eng.htm#intro
It is indeed time the fish farmers became “legitimate.” It is time to remove
their regulatory firewalls, open the farms to public scrutiny and silence
decades of political interference that have given foreign corporations greater
access to Canadian fish than Canadians. All this and these corporations are
still loosing money.
Minister Shea there is one job we cannot do for you. You must close the border
to import of salmon eggs from the Atlantic to prevent introduction of ISA virus
to the eastern Pacific. If you don’t you will see this issue go before the
courts. ISAV strains are highly traceable. You say there is no “strong evidence”
that it travels in eggs (3-11-2009) scientists say we are “guaranteed” to get
the virus if we keep importing eggs.
Others and myself will continue to lay charges under the /Fisheries Act /with
the help of lawyers who are working Pro Bono, and at reduced rates and thousands
of people whose small donations are making this possible. The /Fisheries Act
/specifically encourages the public to lay charges in the face of government
“inertia.”
At the very least I ask that you do not stand in our way.
Minister Gail Shea
Ottawa, Canada
Dear Minister Shea:
Twenty thousand, two hundred forty-three (*20,243*) people have now signed the
letter on my website www.adopt-a-fry.org <http://www.adopt-a-fry.org> insisting
that you apply the /Fisheries Act/ to “farming” salmon.
But the Norwegian salmon farming industry is now so far out of alignment with
common sense and the spirit of Canadian law that the road to compliance is not
simple. As you prepare to assume control of this industry as per the BC Supreme
Court decision we, the public, are doing your job in your absence laying charges
against this industry and removing the firewalls to protect our fish.
Twenty years ago the business of raising salmon was wrongly categorized as
“farming” and assigned to the Province to manage. The Province is not
responsible for wild fish and the feds were not responsible for fish farms, so
no one has been responsible for impact of salmon “farms” on wild fish.
This Provincial regulatory scheme was recognized as unlawful and struck down by
Judge Hinkson, February 2009. He gave government 1 year to sort this out and it
remains uncertain if ownership of salmon (farmed or not) is even legal in the
ocean.
At first it was assumed the Provincial government would somehow continue to run
the industry, but shortly after the August 2009 sockeye crash, the Province
backed away leaving /Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) /scrambling to design a
regulatory regime. As a result a delay is being negotiated during which the
Province expects to continue expanding the industry!
Expansion is crucial to Norwegian fish farmers because they have lost money for
3 years now and their share prices can only rise if they put more fish in the
water. However, we just lost 10 million sockeye that passed through heavily fish
farmed waters and Judge Cohen has “aquaculture” 3rd on his list to investigate
with his Judicial Inquiry. It would be immoral to expand the industry during
this moment of regulatory restructuring and investigation.
When you peel back the layers of the /Fisheries Act/ the conflicting rules make
no sense, except as firewalls. On the one hand the /Pacific (Fishery)
Regulations (1993/) exempts Provincially licenced aquaculture from /all /fishing
regulations appearing to give them unrestricted access to all the wild fish
drawn into their pens by the lights and food. These fish are Atlantic salmon
fodder and highly valuable sablefish, salmon and herring.
Then as if someone recognized the preposterous enormity of this the /Access to
Wild Aquatic Resources 2004/ was produced to licence fish farmers for by-catch,
if the amount was deemed insignificant to wild stocks.
This was a good idea, but no one seems to have these licences. And how could
they? The wild pink salmon Marine Harvest admitted to having in their boat last
June 16 were from an age-class and stock so endangered millions of public
dollars were spent to protect them. However, this is lost in DFO’s regulatory
labyrinth. If Marine Harvest has no licence to possess by-catch, does that mean
that the 1993 regulations come into effect to exempt them from all fishing rules
including possession of an endangered wild fish stock? I hope we get to find
out. Judge Saunderson issued a summons to Marine Harvest to appear in court for
possessing these pink salmon. The Department of Justice could halt this case,
but it would seem in the public interest for a court to hear this.
In October 2009 Marine Harvest also admitted to catching herring in the
Broughton Archipelago and composting them with no reporting or licence. Was this
legal or illegal? Does anyone know? If they had no licence for tons of herring
by-catch are they exempt?
Herring fishing has been closed in Broughton for twenty years because the stocks
are not rebuilding. Now we find out Norwegian “farmers” are killing them despite
the closure with no apparent ramifications, no quota nor reporting. These fish
farmers are out-fishing BC fishermen! Over-fishing is a global scourge.
Minister Shea this is not right.
Nothing is straightforward. When 40,000 Atlantics escaped from Marine Harvest’s
farm October 21, 2009, we were told they were worth a million dollars and
everything had been done to recover them. But now we hear farm fish are
worthless once they escape and only 1,200 were recovered because Marine Harvest
was “confused” about the licence DFO granted them specifically for this
situation. Does profit - starved Marine Harvest really want the expense of
disposing of 40,000 fish? They did not do everything they could have to
recapture their fish and section 55 of the /Fishery (General Regulations)/
states no person shall release live fish into fish habitat. They must be charged
and heavily fined to inspire compliance. This is the tool your Ministry uses on
other fishermen.
It is disturbing that someone lobbied Parliament to disguise the industry as
Provincial farms even though this must have raised legal red flags and then
someone specifically exempted “provincial aquaculture” from the fishing
regulations. This is Salmongate.
We are hosting guests who are pulling the tablecloth into their laps dragging
the silverware, the food, the water /everything/ out of our reach. Thankfully,
Judges Hinkson, Slade, Cohen and Saunderson have nailed the tablecloth to the
table.
However it is not up to the courts to manage fish. /Fisheries and Oceans Canada
/is touring the _National Aquaculture Strategic Action Plan Initiative_ to get
feedback, calling aquaculture a legitimate user of Canadian marine waters.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/lib-bib/nasapi-insapa/nasapi-inpasa-eng.htm#intro
It is indeed time the fish farmers became “legitimate.” It is time to remove
their regulatory firewalls, open the farms to public scrutiny and silence
decades of political interference that have given foreign corporations greater
access to Canadian fish than Canadians. All this and these corporations are
still loosing money.
Minister Shea there is one job we cannot do for you. You must close the border
to import of salmon eggs from the Atlantic to prevent introduction of ISA virus
to the eastern Pacific. If you don’t you will see this issue go before the
courts. ISAV strains are highly traceable. You say there is no “strong evidence”
that it travels in eggs (3-11-2009) scientists say we are “guaranteed” to get
the virus if we keep importing eggs.
Others and myself will continue to lay charges under the /Fisheries Act /with
the help of lawyers who are working Pro Bono, and at reduced rates and thousands
of people whose small donations are making this possible. The /Fisheries Act
/specifically encourages the public to lay charges in the face of government
“inertia.”
At the very least I ask that you do not stand in our way.
Comox Valley Record, 28th November 2009
No influence from U.S. funders, claims aquaculture reform group
Dear editor,
Contrary to Tom Fletcher's latest conspiracy theory (Sockeye go on witness stand, Record, Nov. 10), the Coastal Alliance for Aquaculture Reform (CAAR) decides on upcoming campaign efforts, not U.S. funders.
The science to be pursued, constructive work with government and industry to foster change, research, reports, and advocacy in the marketplace and with the public, are all decided by CAAR members. A proposal is then submitted to potential funders seeking their support for this work.
What funders do not do is dictate to CAAR what the plan should be.
The choice to pursue a constructive engagement with Marine Harvest was a CAAR decision. A key component of CAAR's work with Marine Harvest is an agreement to a cap on the company's total production in the Broughton Archipelago, not an expansion of net-cage aquaculture as suggested in Mr. Fletcher's rant.
CAAR continues to push for the total removal of open net-cage industrial salmon farms from B.C.’s coast and a transition of the industry to closed containment systems —with or without funding from U.S. foundations.
More on our work and our approach can be seen at www.farmedanddangerous.org.
Catherine Stewart,
Vancouver
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/comoxvalleyrecord/opinion/letters/72872822.html
No influence from U.S. funders, claims aquaculture reform group
Dear editor,
Contrary to Tom Fletcher's latest conspiracy theory (Sockeye go on witness stand, Record, Nov. 10), the Coastal Alliance for Aquaculture Reform (CAAR) decides on upcoming campaign efforts, not U.S. funders.
The science to be pursued, constructive work with government and industry to foster change, research, reports, and advocacy in the marketplace and with the public, are all decided by CAAR members. A proposal is then submitted to potential funders seeking their support for this work.
What funders do not do is dictate to CAAR what the plan should be.
The choice to pursue a constructive engagement with Marine Harvest was a CAAR decision. A key component of CAAR's work with Marine Harvest is an agreement to a cap on the company's total production in the Broughton Archipelago, not an expansion of net-cage aquaculture as suggested in Mr. Fletcher's rant.
CAAR continues to push for the total removal of open net-cage industrial salmon farms from B.C.’s coast and a transition of the industry to closed containment systems —with or without funding from U.S. foundations.
More on our work and our approach can be seen at www.farmedanddangerous.org.
Catherine Stewart,
Vancouver
http://www.bclocalnews.com/vancouver_island_north/comoxvalleyrecord/opinion/letters/72872822.html
Dissident Voice, 2nd December 2009
Disappearing the Wild Salmon
Documentary Exposes a Corporate-Government Nexus against the People, Local Industry, and Wildlife
by Kim Petersen
Over 10 million sockeye were forecast by Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) to arrive at the Stó:lô (Fraser River) to spawn, but something happened. The spawning run was only in the hundreds of thousands. Where did 10 million sockeye salmon disappear? First Nation peoples have subsisted for centuries from salmon returning to the Stó:lô; the river’s salmon supported a large commercial fishery. Now there are fears that the Stó:lô/Fraser’s sockeye fishery is commercially extinct. What caused this? Film-maker Damien Gillis identifies corporate salmon farms as the culprit. His film, Farmed Salmon Exposed: The Global Reach of the Norwegian Salmon Farming Industry, presents a damning case of salmon farming’s lethality on wild salmon.
Farmed Salmon Exposed begins at the birthplace of salmon farming — a nation that prides itself as progressive and at the forefront of sustainable development: Norway. However, Norway’s image is tainted by its salmon farming corporations, such as Marine Harvest and Cermaq, which are killing wild salmon.
The repercussions from corporate salmon farming are myriad. The corporations farm unsustainably, disrupt local ecosystems, contaminate and degrade the marine environment, cause socio-economic dislocation, disrespect the rights of Original Peoples, and lobby susceptible governments against their people’s and future generations’s best interests.
The major profits from this activity — so destructive of the local environment and ecosystem — flows to shareholders elsewhere.
The solution is simple and has long been known: closed containment. It is only a partial solution since the farming of a predator like salmon is nutritionally unsustainable, requiring five kilos of protein in feed for each kilo of salmon produced. Moreover, the nutritional safety and quality of farmed salmon is dubious.
The documentary presents three primary concerns about salmon farms: sea lice, viruses, and escapes. These same problems plague salmon farming in Norway and plague other industries such as tourism. Norwegian politicians, though, have called for an increase in farmed salmon production.
However, with the intent to protect its wild salmon, Norway forbade salmon farming in some fjords. This appears ipso facto to be an admission that salmon farms endanger wild salmon.
Concerned people in other nations seek to protect their wild salmon as well. Farmed Salmon Exposed details the crises in Scotland, Ireland, “The Indian Territories”/BC, and Chile.
The Original Peoples of the Pacific Northwest have long been known as the salmon people. Bob Chamberlain of the Kwicksutaineuk-ah-kwaw-ah-mish Nation decried the salmon-farm caused despoliation of their traditional waters to Norwegians.
Marine Harvest officials declared that they would not leave BC, and the BC government sides with the foreign multinationals against its citizens and Original Peoples. Gail Shea, DFO minister, said on film that there was “no concrete analysis” of the sockeye collapse and that it was “too early to tell” if salmon farms were to blame. She said she was in Norway to “support our aquaculture industry in Canada because it is a very important part of our economy.” Instead of taking a precautionary approach until the safety of salmon farming can be established, the Canadian government gambles with the fate of wild salmon.
One can’t help but scratch one’s head. From a purely economic point-of-view, why would the federal government promote the interests of foreign multinationals (92 percent foreign ownership in BC) over the far more valuable BC commercial fishery, over the BC recreational fishery, over the province’s largest industry – tourism? Where will it lead?
Gillis turns his camera to Chile and the devastation wrought by the Norwegian-owned salmon farms: excessive antibiotic use, hypoxic conditions leading to algal blooms, pollution, “a psychological crisis for the people,” illness and death of workers, and disregard for the indigenous Mapuche.
Greed for quick profits has cost the Norwegian multinationals in their Chilean operations. Having abandoned the initial salmon-farming ravaged areas in Chile, the Norwegians eye moving south into the pristine waters of the Mapuche in Patagonia.
Chileans are concerned. Citizens of BC have an additional concern: their wild salmon. University of BC professor Daniel Pauly tells Farmed Salmon Exposed concerned citizens need to mobilize in an “organized fashion” against poor salmon-farming practices. Dissent is occurring.
Part of the DFO’s self-professed mission is working toward “Healthy and Productive Aquatic Ecosystems; and Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture.” The DFO, which presided over the collapse of the massive cod fishery on Canada’s east coast, comes in for scathing criticism in the film, including from its former biologists, like Otto Langer.
Dedicated wild salmon biologist-activist Alexandra Morton is a voice of reason in the film. Recently, Morton has sought to force the federal government and DFO to protect wild fish.
Morton laid charges against Marine Harvest for illegal possession of juvenile wild salmon and called upon the DFO to uphold the Fisheries Act and lay a charge themselves. Morton’s activism has resulted in a judge in Port Hardy, BC, approving the charge and summoning Marine Harvest to appear in court.
Will Gillis document a victory for the common people (and wildlife) over corporate profiteers? Stayed tuned for the sequel.
Kim Petersen is co-editor of Dissident Voice. He can be reached at: kim@dissidentvoice.org. Read other articles by Kim, or visit Kim's website.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/12/disappearing-the-wild-salmon/
Disappearing the Wild Salmon
Documentary Exposes a Corporate-Government Nexus against the People, Local Industry, and Wildlife
by Kim Petersen
Over 10 million sockeye were forecast by Canada’s Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) to arrive at the Stó:lô (Fraser River) to spawn, but something happened. The spawning run was only in the hundreds of thousands. Where did 10 million sockeye salmon disappear? First Nation peoples have subsisted for centuries from salmon returning to the Stó:lô; the river’s salmon supported a large commercial fishery. Now there are fears that the Stó:lô/Fraser’s sockeye fishery is commercially extinct. What caused this? Film-maker Damien Gillis identifies corporate salmon farms as the culprit. His film, Farmed Salmon Exposed: The Global Reach of the Norwegian Salmon Farming Industry, presents a damning case of salmon farming’s lethality on wild salmon.
Farmed Salmon Exposed begins at the birthplace of salmon farming — a nation that prides itself as progressive and at the forefront of sustainable development: Norway. However, Norway’s image is tainted by its salmon farming corporations, such as Marine Harvest and Cermaq, which are killing wild salmon.
The repercussions from corporate salmon farming are myriad. The corporations farm unsustainably, disrupt local ecosystems, contaminate and degrade the marine environment, cause socio-economic dislocation, disrespect the rights of Original Peoples, and lobby susceptible governments against their people’s and future generations’s best interests.
The major profits from this activity — so destructive of the local environment and ecosystem — flows to shareholders elsewhere.
The solution is simple and has long been known: closed containment. It is only a partial solution since the farming of a predator like salmon is nutritionally unsustainable, requiring five kilos of protein in feed for each kilo of salmon produced. Moreover, the nutritional safety and quality of farmed salmon is dubious.
The documentary presents three primary concerns about salmon farms: sea lice, viruses, and escapes. These same problems plague salmon farming in Norway and plague other industries such as tourism. Norwegian politicians, though, have called for an increase in farmed salmon production.
However, with the intent to protect its wild salmon, Norway forbade salmon farming in some fjords. This appears ipso facto to be an admission that salmon farms endanger wild salmon.
Concerned people in other nations seek to protect their wild salmon as well. Farmed Salmon Exposed details the crises in Scotland, Ireland, “The Indian Territories”/BC, and Chile.
The Original Peoples of the Pacific Northwest have long been known as the salmon people. Bob Chamberlain of the Kwicksutaineuk-ah-kwaw-ah-mish Nation decried the salmon-farm caused despoliation of their traditional waters to Norwegians.
Marine Harvest officials declared that they would not leave BC, and the BC government sides with the foreign multinationals against its citizens and Original Peoples. Gail Shea, DFO minister, said on film that there was “no concrete analysis” of the sockeye collapse and that it was “too early to tell” if salmon farms were to blame. She said she was in Norway to “support our aquaculture industry in Canada because it is a very important part of our economy.” Instead of taking a precautionary approach until the safety of salmon farming can be established, the Canadian government gambles with the fate of wild salmon.
One can’t help but scratch one’s head. From a purely economic point-of-view, why would the federal government promote the interests of foreign multinationals (92 percent foreign ownership in BC) over the far more valuable BC commercial fishery, over the BC recreational fishery, over the province’s largest industry – tourism? Where will it lead?
Gillis turns his camera to Chile and the devastation wrought by the Norwegian-owned salmon farms: excessive antibiotic use, hypoxic conditions leading to algal blooms, pollution, “a psychological crisis for the people,” illness and death of workers, and disregard for the indigenous Mapuche.
Greed for quick profits has cost the Norwegian multinationals in their Chilean operations. Having abandoned the initial salmon-farming ravaged areas in Chile, the Norwegians eye moving south into the pristine waters of the Mapuche in Patagonia.
Chileans are concerned. Citizens of BC have an additional concern: their wild salmon. University of BC professor Daniel Pauly tells Farmed Salmon Exposed concerned citizens need to mobilize in an “organized fashion” against poor salmon-farming practices. Dissent is occurring.
Part of the DFO’s self-professed mission is working toward “Healthy and Productive Aquatic Ecosystems; and Sustainable Fisheries and Aquaculture.” The DFO, which presided over the collapse of the massive cod fishery on Canada’s east coast, comes in for scathing criticism in the film, including from its former biologists, like Otto Langer.
Dedicated wild salmon biologist-activist Alexandra Morton is a voice of reason in the film. Recently, Morton has sought to force the federal government and DFO to protect wild fish.
Morton laid charges against Marine Harvest for illegal possession of juvenile wild salmon and called upon the DFO to uphold the Fisheries Act and lay a charge themselves. Morton’s activism has resulted in a judge in Port Hardy, BC, approving the charge and summoning Marine Harvest to appear in court.
Will Gillis document a victory for the common people (and wildlife) over corporate profiteers? Stayed tuned for the sequel.
Kim Petersen is co-editor of Dissident Voice. He can be reached at: kim@dissidentvoice.org. Read other articles by Kim, or visit Kim's website.
http://dissidentvoice.org/2009/12/disappearing-the-wild-salmon/
Minister Gail Shea
Ottawa, Canada
Dear Minister Shea:
Twenty thousand, two hundred forty-three (20,243) people have now signed the letter on my website www.adopt-a-fry.org insisting that you apply the Fisheries Act to “farming” salmon.
But the Norwegian salmon farming industry is now so far out of alignment with common sense and the spirit of Canadian law that the road to compliance is not simple. As you prepare to assume control of this industry as per the BC Supreme Court decision we, the public, are doing your job in your absence laying charges against this industry and removing the firewalls to protect our fish.
Twenty years ago the business of raising salmon was wrongly categorized as “farming” and assigned to the Province to manage. The Province is not responsible for wild fish and the feds were not responsible for fish farms, so no one has been responsible for impact of salmon “farms” on wild fish.
This Provincial regulatory scheme was recognized as unlawful and struck down by Judge Hinkson, February 2009. He gave government 1 year to sort this out and it remains uncertain if ownership of salmon (farmed or not) is even legal in the ocean.
At first it was assumed the Provincial government would somehow continue to run the industry, but shortly after the August 2009 sockeye crash, the Province backed away leaving Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) scrambling to design a regulatory regime. As a result a delay is being negotiated during which the Province expects to continue expanding the industry!
Expansion is crucial to Norwegian fish farmers because they have lost money for 3 years now and their share prices can only rise if they put more fish in the water. However, we just lost 10 million sockeye that passed through heavily fish farmed waters and Judge Cohen has “aquaculture” 3rd on his list to investigate with his Judicial Inquiry. It would be immoral to expand the industry during this moment of regulatory restructuring and investigation.
When you peel back the layers of the Fisheries Act the conflicting rules make no sense, except as firewalls. On the one hand the Pacific (Fishery) Regulations (1993) exempts Provincially licenced aquaculture from all fishing regulations appearing to give them unrestricted access to all the wild fish drawn into their pens by the lights and food. These fish are Atlantic salmon fodder and highly valuable sablefish, salmon and herring.
Then as if someone recognized the preposterous enormity of this the Access to Wild Aquatic Resources 2004 was produced to licence fish farmers for by-catch, if the amount was deemed insignificant to wild stocks.
This was a good idea, but no one seems to have these licences. And how could they? The wild pink salmon Marine Harvest admitted to having in their boat last June 16 were from an age-class and stock so endangered millions of public dollars were spent to protect them. However, this is lost in DFO’s regulatory labyrinth. If Marine Harvest has no licence to possess by-catch, does that mean that the 1993 regulations come into effect to exempt them from all fishing rules including possession of an endangered wild fish stock? I hope we get to find out. Judge Saunderson issued a summons to Marine Harvest to appear in court for possessing these pink salmon. The Department of Justice could halt this case, but it would seem in the public interest for a court to hear this.
In October 2009 Marine Harvest also admitted to catching herring in the Broughton Archipelago and composting them with no reporting or licence. Was this legal or illegal? Does anyone know? If they had no licence for tons of herring by-catch are they exempt?
Herring fishing has been closed in Broughton for twenty years because the stocks are not rebuilding. Now we find out Norwegian “farmers” are killing them despite the closure with no apparent ramifications, no quota nor reporting. These fish farmers are out-fishing BC fishermen! Over-fishing is a global scourge. Minister Shea this is not right.
Nothing is straightforward. When 40,000 Atlantics escaped from Marine Harvest’s farm October 21, 2009, we were told they were worth a million dollars and everything had been done to recover them. But now we hear farm fish are worthless once they escape and only 1,200 were recovered because Marine Harvest was “confused” about the licence DFO granted them specifically for this situation. Does profit - starved Marine Harvest really want the expense of disposing of 40,000 fish? They did not do everything they could have to recapture their fish and section 55 of the Fishery (General Regulations) states no person shall release live fish into fish habitat. They must be charged and heavily fined to inspire compliance. This is the tool your Ministry uses on other fishermen.
It is disturbing that someone lobbied Parliament to disguise the industry as Provincial farms even though this must have raised legal red flags and then someone specifically exempted “provincial aquaculture” from the fishing regulations. This is Salmongate.
We are hosting guests who are pulling the tablecloth into their laps dragging the silverware, the food, the water everything out of our reach. Thankfully, Judges Hinkson, Slade, Cohen and Saunderson have nailed the tablecloth to the table.
However it is not up to the courts to manage fish. Fisheries and Oceans Canada is touring the National Aquaculture Strategic Action Plan Initiative to get feedback, calling aquaculture a legitimate user of Canadian marine waters.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/lib-bib/nasapi-insapa/nasapi-inpasa-eng.htm#intro
It is indeed time the fish farmers became “legitimate.” It is time to remove their regulatory firewalls, open the farms to public scrutiny and silence decades of political interference that have given foreign corporations greater access to Canadian fish than Canadians. All this and these corporations are still loosing money.
Minister Shea there is one job we cannot do for you. You must close the border to import of salmon eggs from the Atlantic to prevent introduction of ISA virus to the eastern Pacific. If you don’t you will see this issue go before the courts. ISAV strains are highly traceable. You say there is no “strong evidence” that it travels in eggs (3-11-2009) scientists say we are “guaranteed” to get the virus if we keep importing eggs.
Others and myself will continue to lay charges under the Fisheries Act with the help of lawyers who are working Pro Bono, and at reduced rates and thousands of people whose small donations are making this possible. The Fisheries Act specifically encourages the public to lay charges in the face of government “inertia.”
At the very least I ask that you do not stand in our way.
Source: Alexandra Morton
Ottawa, Canada
Dear Minister Shea:
Twenty thousand, two hundred forty-three (20,243) people have now signed the letter on my website www.adopt-a-fry.org insisting that you apply the Fisheries Act to “farming” salmon.
But the Norwegian salmon farming industry is now so far out of alignment with common sense and the spirit of Canadian law that the road to compliance is not simple. As you prepare to assume control of this industry as per the BC Supreme Court decision we, the public, are doing your job in your absence laying charges against this industry and removing the firewalls to protect our fish.
Twenty years ago the business of raising salmon was wrongly categorized as “farming” and assigned to the Province to manage. The Province is not responsible for wild fish and the feds were not responsible for fish farms, so no one has been responsible for impact of salmon “farms” on wild fish.
This Provincial regulatory scheme was recognized as unlawful and struck down by Judge Hinkson, February 2009. He gave government 1 year to sort this out and it remains uncertain if ownership of salmon (farmed or not) is even legal in the ocean.
At first it was assumed the Provincial government would somehow continue to run the industry, but shortly after the August 2009 sockeye crash, the Province backed away leaving Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) scrambling to design a regulatory regime. As a result a delay is being negotiated during which the Province expects to continue expanding the industry!
Expansion is crucial to Norwegian fish farmers because they have lost money for 3 years now and their share prices can only rise if they put more fish in the water. However, we just lost 10 million sockeye that passed through heavily fish farmed waters and Judge Cohen has “aquaculture” 3rd on his list to investigate with his Judicial Inquiry. It would be immoral to expand the industry during this moment of regulatory restructuring and investigation.
When you peel back the layers of the Fisheries Act the conflicting rules make no sense, except as firewalls. On the one hand the Pacific (Fishery) Regulations (1993) exempts Provincially licenced aquaculture from all fishing regulations appearing to give them unrestricted access to all the wild fish drawn into their pens by the lights and food. These fish are Atlantic salmon fodder and highly valuable sablefish, salmon and herring.
Then as if someone recognized the preposterous enormity of this the Access to Wild Aquatic Resources 2004 was produced to licence fish farmers for by-catch, if the amount was deemed insignificant to wild stocks.
This was a good idea, but no one seems to have these licences. And how could they? The wild pink salmon Marine Harvest admitted to having in their boat last June 16 were from an age-class and stock so endangered millions of public dollars were spent to protect them. However, this is lost in DFO’s regulatory labyrinth. If Marine Harvest has no licence to possess by-catch, does that mean that the 1993 regulations come into effect to exempt them from all fishing rules including possession of an endangered wild fish stock? I hope we get to find out. Judge Saunderson issued a summons to Marine Harvest to appear in court for possessing these pink salmon. The Department of Justice could halt this case, but it would seem in the public interest for a court to hear this.
In October 2009 Marine Harvest also admitted to catching herring in the Broughton Archipelago and composting them with no reporting or licence. Was this legal or illegal? Does anyone know? If they had no licence for tons of herring by-catch are they exempt?
Herring fishing has been closed in Broughton for twenty years because the stocks are not rebuilding. Now we find out Norwegian “farmers” are killing them despite the closure with no apparent ramifications, no quota nor reporting. These fish farmers are out-fishing BC fishermen! Over-fishing is a global scourge. Minister Shea this is not right.
Nothing is straightforward. When 40,000 Atlantics escaped from Marine Harvest’s farm October 21, 2009, we were told they were worth a million dollars and everything had been done to recover them. But now we hear farm fish are worthless once they escape and only 1,200 were recovered because Marine Harvest was “confused” about the licence DFO granted them specifically for this situation. Does profit - starved Marine Harvest really want the expense of disposing of 40,000 fish? They did not do everything they could have to recapture their fish and section 55 of the Fishery (General Regulations) states no person shall release live fish into fish habitat. They must be charged and heavily fined to inspire compliance. This is the tool your Ministry uses on other fishermen.
It is disturbing that someone lobbied Parliament to disguise the industry as Provincial farms even though this must have raised legal red flags and then someone specifically exempted “provincial aquaculture” from the fishing regulations. This is Salmongate.
We are hosting guests who are pulling the tablecloth into their laps dragging the silverware, the food, the water everything out of our reach. Thankfully, Judges Hinkson, Slade, Cohen and Saunderson have nailed the tablecloth to the table.
However it is not up to the courts to manage fish. Fisheries and Oceans Canada is touring the National Aquaculture Strategic Action Plan Initiative to get feedback, calling aquaculture a legitimate user of Canadian marine waters.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/lib-bib/nasapi-insapa/nasapi-inpasa-eng.htm#intro
It is indeed time the fish farmers became “legitimate.” It is time to remove their regulatory firewalls, open the farms to public scrutiny and silence decades of political interference that have given foreign corporations greater access to Canadian fish than Canadians. All this and these corporations are still loosing money.
Minister Shea there is one job we cannot do for you. You must close the border to import of salmon eggs from the Atlantic to prevent introduction of ISA virus to the eastern Pacific. If you don’t you will see this issue go before the courts. ISAV strains are highly traceable. You say there is no “strong evidence” that it travels in eggs (3-11-2009) scientists say we are “guaranteed” to get the virus if we keep importing eggs.
Others and myself will continue to lay charges under the Fisheries Act with the help of lawyers who are working Pro Bono, and at reduced rates and thousands of people whose small donations are making this possible. The Fisheries Act specifically encourages the public to lay charges in the face of government “inertia.”
At the very least I ask that you do not stand in our way.
Source: Alexandra Morton
The Courier Islander, 27th November 2009
Trevena says change is good
Dan MacLennan
Efforts to streamline regulations surrounding the recapture of escaped farm fish are a good thing, says North Island MLA Claire Trevena.
Trevena commented in the wake of events connected to the escape of an estimated 40,000 Atlantic salmon from Marine Harvest's Port Elizabeth farm in the Broughton Archipelago area last month. Despite schooling outside the nets for hours in the lights of a fish boat, the vast majority of the fish dispersed before a seiner approved on the company's ZZA recapture licence arrived the next day. Less than 1,200 fish were recovered. That led to a DFO official saying last week the department was looking to make improvements to the recapture regulations. The escape also led fish farm opponent Alexandra Morton to question the company's commitment to recapturing the fish after Marine Harvest admitted company policy deems the fish unmarketable the instant they escape.
"The company has a responsibility to ensure that the fish are collected, whether or not they are of any monetary worth to the company," Trevena said Wednesday. "I'm pleased that DFO is going to be looking at the regulations here to make sure that we can avoid something like this happening. I think that the best effort is made to prevent escapes. Escapes are happening so let's make sure that if escapes happen, that it's dealt with immediately. So if there's a boat on scene, that boat can come in and pick up the fish, and the company can deal with them as it deems necessary."
http://www2.canada.com/courierislander/news/story.html?id=43ddc757-8c28-4e00-8aaa-0ef51b2f5061
Pacific Free Press, 27th November 2009
One Step Closer to Saving the Pacific Salmon from Fish Farms
The Fisheries Act Does Apply!
by Alexandra Morton
Hello All; we are one step closer to applying the laws of Canada to salmon farming! It was a pivotal day in court. Although it is only one more step towards enforcing the laws of Canada on fish farmers, it was essential if we are to bring reason to this situation.
In September I laid charges against Marine Harvest for illegal possession of juvenile wild salmon. This came after months of correspondence with Fisheries and Oceans, asking them to uphold the Fisheries Act and lay a charge themselves.
Today was our third court appearance. The first two were simply to set dates, and then extend those dates so that the Department of Justice could review the details of the case. Today's appearance was a "process hearing" with a judge to lay out the charge and our evidence. The judge could either have refused to issue a summons, or approve the charge.
Today in Port Hardy, the judge approved the charge and a summons will be issued to Marine Harvest to appear in court and the trial could proceed.
There are several directions this could take from this point:
1. The Department of Justice could take the case over and run the case. My lawyer, Jeff Jones and I are hoping this will occur as this is truly David against Goliath, a tiny North Island law firm working Pro Bono to date, against a multi billion dollar international corporation. A round of applause for Jeffery and Marianne Jones they have done so much already!
2. If the Department of Justice takes the case, they could proceed to trial where all evidence can be heard, and a Judge will rule on the merit of the case. Or, the Department of Justice can stay the charges and the case is closed without a trial.
3. Jeff Jones and I might have to run the trial ourselves. While this seems a good idea, the reality is a tidal wave of paperwork that could overwhelm his firm, even though this appears to be an extremely straightforward charge which many fishermen have faced. However, well funded corporate defendants can stretch a trial out for days if not weeks, making it extremely costly for a private citizen to enforce the Fisheries Act.
In any case we are setting precedence. Canada cannot manage its fisheries in a sustainable way unless the laws about how many fish are caught are enforced. Over-fishing is a global problem, it is not sound management to allow salmon farmers unlimited access to BC wild fish.
Thanks to all of you for all your support. If you know anyone who would like to join us in signing the letter to the Minister of Fisheries to PLEASE ENFORCE THE FISHERIES ACT, the letter is still on our website www.adopt-a-fry.org. <http://www.adopt-a-fry.org.> Until the Federal government is
willing to uphold the laws of Canada we will continue to do what we can to fill the void.
My deepest thanks to all of you, we face tough stretch ahead, but once again the courts have agreed with our position.
A remarkable film will be released next week on the Global impact of salmon farming, here is the trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eggrGn0V0fg
No individual can right the wrongs we have wreaked on our planet. Thank you all for being with me on this.
alexandra
http://www.pacificfreepress.com/new...aving-the-pacific-salmon-from-fish-farms.html
Trevena says change is good
Dan MacLennan
Efforts to streamline regulations surrounding the recapture of escaped farm fish are a good thing, says North Island MLA Claire Trevena.
Trevena commented in the wake of events connected to the escape of an estimated 40,000 Atlantic salmon from Marine Harvest's Port Elizabeth farm in the Broughton Archipelago area last month. Despite schooling outside the nets for hours in the lights of a fish boat, the vast majority of the fish dispersed before a seiner approved on the company's ZZA recapture licence arrived the next day. Less than 1,200 fish were recovered. That led to a DFO official saying last week the department was looking to make improvements to the recapture regulations. The escape also led fish farm opponent Alexandra Morton to question the company's commitment to recapturing the fish after Marine Harvest admitted company policy deems the fish unmarketable the instant they escape.
"The company has a responsibility to ensure that the fish are collected, whether or not they are of any monetary worth to the company," Trevena said Wednesday. "I'm pleased that DFO is going to be looking at the regulations here to make sure that we can avoid something like this happening. I think that the best effort is made to prevent escapes. Escapes are happening so let's make sure that if escapes happen, that it's dealt with immediately. So if there's a boat on scene, that boat can come in and pick up the fish, and the company can deal with them as it deems necessary."
http://www2.canada.com/courierislander/news/story.html?id=43ddc757-8c28-4e00-8aaa-0ef51b2f5061
Pacific Free Press, 27th November 2009
One Step Closer to Saving the Pacific Salmon from Fish Farms
The Fisheries Act Does Apply!
by Alexandra Morton
Hello All; we are one step closer to applying the laws of Canada to salmon farming! It was a pivotal day in court. Although it is only one more step towards enforcing the laws of Canada on fish farmers, it was essential if we are to bring reason to this situation.
In September I laid charges against Marine Harvest for illegal possession of juvenile wild salmon. This came after months of correspondence with Fisheries and Oceans, asking them to uphold the Fisheries Act and lay a charge themselves.
Today was our third court appearance. The first two were simply to set dates, and then extend those dates so that the Department of Justice could review the details of the case. Today's appearance was a "process hearing" with a judge to lay out the charge and our evidence. The judge could either have refused to issue a summons, or approve the charge.
Today in Port Hardy, the judge approved the charge and a summons will be issued to Marine Harvest to appear in court and the trial could proceed.
There are several directions this could take from this point:
1. The Department of Justice could take the case over and run the case. My lawyer, Jeff Jones and I are hoping this will occur as this is truly David against Goliath, a tiny North Island law firm working Pro Bono to date, against a multi billion dollar international corporation. A round of applause for Jeffery and Marianne Jones they have done so much already!
2. If the Department of Justice takes the case, they could proceed to trial where all evidence can be heard, and a Judge will rule on the merit of the case. Or, the Department of Justice can stay the charges and the case is closed without a trial.
3. Jeff Jones and I might have to run the trial ourselves. While this seems a good idea, the reality is a tidal wave of paperwork that could overwhelm his firm, even though this appears to be an extremely straightforward charge which many fishermen have faced. However, well funded corporate defendants can stretch a trial out for days if not weeks, making it extremely costly for a private citizen to enforce the Fisheries Act.
In any case we are setting precedence. Canada cannot manage its fisheries in a sustainable way unless the laws about how many fish are caught are enforced. Over-fishing is a global problem, it is not sound management to allow salmon farmers unlimited access to BC wild fish.
Thanks to all of you for all your support. If you know anyone who would like to join us in signing the letter to the Minister of Fisheries to PLEASE ENFORCE THE FISHERIES ACT, the letter is still on our website www.adopt-a-fry.org. <http://www.adopt-a-fry.org.> Until the Federal government is
willing to uphold the laws of Canada we will continue to do what we can to fill the void.
My deepest thanks to all of you, we face tough stretch ahead, but once again the courts have agreed with our position.
A remarkable film will be released next week on the Global impact of salmon farming, here is the trailer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eggrGn0V0fg
No individual can right the wrongs we have wreaked on our planet. Thank you all for being with me on this.
alexandra
http://www.pacificfreepress.com/new...aving-the-pacific-salmon-from-fish-farms.html
Similar threads
