bigdogeh
Well-Known Member
I think it was because of all the cut and pasting (which I wonder how much of it you truly understand) plus the fact you didn’t listen to me before on this. See where it got you. Since the 2003 IHN outbreak, the BC fish farm industry employed new bio security protocols, monitoring, detection, and fish movement practices (including 3rd party vessel operating practices), on-site culling of farmed fish on impacted farm and a variety of other measures. They did these changes because IHNv is a very high risk pathogen and it was getting unintentionally passed to adjacent farms through shared equipment and vessels. In addition, there was a lag time (up to 2 weeks) between initial detection of impacted farmed fish and CFIA confirmation of the virus. Well in that amount of time the virus and resulting disease (IHN) can spread quite rapidly - potentially impacting adjacent farm creating more losses. This is what happened in 2003. Following the 2003 outbreak, the industry is much more proactive and will destroy impacted and non impacted farmed fish once they detect it and not wait for CFIA confirmation. This is one of the reason why IHNv transmission from farmed salmon to Fraser Sockeye salmon was determined to be minimal risk. Compensation under the legislation is provided if the CFIA orders that the stock is to be destroyed - not if the impacted farm decides to be proactive and do it before the order is given.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/compensation-set-for-bc-bird-farmers/article18266705/
https://www.canadianpoultrymag.com/business-policy/who-pays-for-an-ai-crisis-30009
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals.../compensation/eng/1313712524829/1313712773700
http://www.vancouversun.com/news/farms+netted+million+compensation+diseased+fish/9788388/story.html
Believe me Shuswap, after seeing this industry and government in action I don't believe they do much to try to safeguard our wild salmon stocks. They certainly don't cull their infected fish to try to cut down on infectious disease transmittance to our wild salmon. As you mentioned, they are culled to try to save their fish in adjacent fish farms. So I guess fish farmers believe disease and virus are capable of travelling distances and aren't contained locally to a farm? Guess it depends on what fish they are trying to save or who's minds they are trying to sway. Any money spent by the open net pen industry in regard to cull, disease, sea lice, etc is to maximize profits and minimize losses, unfortunately often to the detriment of our wild stocks and environment, and often to the detriment of the taxpayers pocketbook. Wonder why they even regulate at all. They don't seem to enforce any of the regulations that I can see. The bloodwater pipe crap that is going on all up and down our coast is an example of the industry being regulated? what a joke. Bio-security protocals? Yeah, that'll save our salmon from those infectious diseases...

Interesting that you admit IHNv is highly contagious and can spread quite rapidly, but also believe their is no risk to our wild stocks... Kinda like pissing down my back and then telling me it's raining. Sorry, don't buy it. And many others don't either...
Last edited: