N.S. fish farm rejected: risk to wild salmon.

Status
Not open for further replies.
Salmon health research project gets underway in B.C.
Canada: An in-depth study aimed at investigating the role of disease among juvenile, out-migrating salmon will be looking at both “wild” and farmed salmon stocks


Tips en venn Utskriftsvennlig
Odd Grydeland

The overwhelming majority of data related to the health of salmon in British Columbia collected over the past thirty years comes from the province’s salmon farming industry. All Atlantic salmon farmers have for years been keeping track of fish health issues such as diagnostic results, mortality levels and sea lice monitoring results. The information is stored in an industry-owned database that has been kept up to date on a monthly basis. Much of the information contained in this database was made available to the recently-concluded Cohen Commission into the failure of the 2009 sockeye salmon return to the Fraser River. By the time its final report was published, the Fraser River had seen its best return of sockeye salmon in about a hundred years. And a lot of B.C.'s "wild" salmon (approximately 500 million per year) start their lives in hatcheries and/or ocean net-pens before being released into "the wild".

The lead institutions for this new project will be the Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada and the Pacific Salmon Foundation. One of the founding agencies is Genome BC, which describes the study this way;

This project has been initiated for a variety of reasons, the primary one being the high mortality rate of juvenile salmon during their early ocean migration. There is a strong belief within the scientific community that infectious disease may be a significant factor in this mortality, but not enough is known about what disease agents might affect Pacific salmon in their natural habitats. What is known comes almost exclusively from observations of cultured fish (both in hatcheries and aquaculture).

The project intends to clarify the presence and/or absence of microbes in Pacific salmon. To address this issue the initiative will involve a four-phased program to discover the microbes present in Pacific salmon that may reduce the productivity of our Pacific salmon. In the initial phase of the work the primary goal is to obtain collections of wild, hatchery and aquaculture salmonids from southern BC. This phase will provide a tissue inventory for assessment of microbes carried both by wild and cultured salmon in BC. The first steps also include the development of a stakeholder consultation process that will provide input to the information needs, public engagement and communications and ways to integrate research on microbes and disease on BC salmon.

•Phase 1 (May 2012 to April 2013) establishes a large-scale sampling program, running over 12 months, for wild, hatchery and aquaculture salmon that will be conducted in 2012 and early 2013. This Phase will not conduct analysis on samples.
•Phase 2 (April 2013 to April 2015) will develop, test and validate a novel, high throughput genomic technology to get a ‘snapshot’ of the microbes carried by wild and cultured salmon in BC. Validation of assay results across laboratories and platforms will provide confidence in the results and technologies implemented.
•Phase 3 (October 2014 to October 2016) will focus in on the microbes identified in Phase 2, with an emphasis on microbes that have not been extensively researched previously and that are thought to be of pathological significance in salmon. This Phase will begin towards the end of Phase 2 to expedite information needs on microbes that are newly discovered in BC salmon.
•Phase 4 (October 2016 to October 2017) will include reporting of research and presentations to management agencies on the potential utility of methods developed and the application of outcomes to future monitoring. The culmination of the project will likely be in 2017 when data has been compiled and research outcomes are clear.
Publisert: 23.04.13 kl 07:00
 
You guys are forgetting one very important word, and that is "POTENTIAL" What Cohen said is the farms have the potential, not that they are introducing an exotic disease.

Do you know what else has the a greater POTENTIAL...... Boats being trailered all over the west coast. How come none of you aren't advocating for bilge water disinfection ?
 
You guys are forgetting one very important word, and that is "POTENTIAL" What Cohen said is the farms have the potential, not that they are introducing an exotic disease.

Do you know what else has the a greater POTENTIAL...... Boats being trailered all over the west coast. How come none of you aren't advocating for bilge water disinfection ?

Most bilge water does not have the potential to spread disease. Might be oily and dirty but I can't remember using slice to get rid of sealice in my bilge
 
Thanks for sharing the op ed by Ian Roberts, Sockeyefry. Forgot to add him to the list of media shrills.

GLC: thanks for responding to Sockeyefry's posting of another op ed by Grydeland quoting Roberts. One gets so TIRED of responding to all the misinformation out there posted by pro-farm media shrills.

Charlie: ANOTHER very excellent post! It's GREAT having your input here. I never knew about the Community Toolbox.

1 more tactic to add to that long list of how your government and/or industry officials/shrills (sometimes hard to know where one ends and the other begins) manipulate information is by manipulating the debate by only allowing “approved” topics on an meeting agenda they have already discussed and approved BEFORE they even decided that they needed to do damage control and talk to a particular community or group.

Then they have a note-taker who selectively filters (job: deflection, deceit) the discussion notes, and writes-up a skewed meeting notes carefully omitting the dangerous hot buttons.

Usually they also have in attendance a cheerful, humourous “dove” (often in the form of a pretty, young uniformed lady, job: distraction), and a “hawk” (Job: deflection) - someone who has lawyers on speed dial and keeps the discussion away from anything substantial - “What about that Canucks game, last night?”.

Sometimes they throw-in a third person with a very bad accent (job: deflection, distraction) who has the communications departments number on speed dial who spews motherhood statements in such a bad accent that nobody wants to ask them to repeat anything. That's both DFOs AND CFIAs community communication teams. Good luck having an open and honest dialogue with either of those departments.

SalmonKiller: Sockeyefry has nicely shown us an example of “Deflection”. Thanks SF. SF will then take the conversation onto a discussion of invasive species rather than having an open conversation about fish health and how poorly the fish farm industry is regulated wrt transfer of potential diseases onto wild stocks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You guys are forgetting one very important word, and that is "POTENTIAL" What Cohen said is the farms have the potential, not that they are introducing an exotic disease.

Do you know what else has the a greater POTENTIAL...... Boats being trailered all over the west coast. How come none of you aren't advocating for bilge water disinfection ?

Actually, might want to look up Washington State law and be ready to even be pulled over and have your personal boat inspected; to include, your bilge!

GLG

What volume are those pgs in?


Judge Cohen actually does use the word "potential" several times, which is of course being used out of context by several pro-feedlot individuals. Judge Cohen actually accepts the evidence and facts and states: " I accept the undisputed evidence that Fraser River sockeye face some likelihood of harm occurring from diseases and pathogens on salmon farms.""However, I cannot quantify the likelihood of harm occurring based on the evidence before me."

In his use of the term "potential" it is NOT "if" feedlots were spreading diseases and pathogens, his [question] is whether the feedlot "potential harm is serious or irreversible."

Under 'What is the likelihood of harm occurring?' he states:
"However, researchers testifying before me did not agree on whether diseases and pathogens from fish farms may have contributed to the decline or may pose risks of significant harm to Fraser River sockeye. I accept the evidence that the state of scientific research about sockeye–fish farm interactions is not sufficiently developed to rule out diseases on salmon farms as contributing to the decline of Fraser River sockeye and posing future risks."

"Of all the expert witnesses I heard from on the topics of salmon farms or diseases, no one told me there is no likelihood of harm occurring to Fraser River sockeye from diseases and pathogens on fish farms."

" I accept the undisputed evidence that Fraser River sockeye face some likelihood of harm occurring from diseases and pathogens on salmon farms."

"However, I cannot quantify the likelihood of harm occurring based on the evidence before me." Scientists do not know enough about farmed–wild fish interactions, and about how pathogens present on salmon farms affect Fraser River sockeye, to be able to quantify those risks to wild sockeye. Dr. Noakes and Dr. Dill agreed that more research into the effects of diseases on wild stocks such as sockeye is necessary, and Dr. Michael Kent, author of Technical Report 1, Infectious Diseases, and other witnesses told me that little population level research about disease has been done on Fraser River sockeye. As David Marmorek, lead author of Technical Report 6, Data Synthesis, aptly described the situation: in the absence of research, scientists are left with plausible hypotheses and mechanisms whereby salmon farms might cause disease in wild fish. The likelihood of this outcome occurring and resulting in harm requires further study.


Under 'Is the potential harm serious or irreversible?' states:
"Having concluded that there is some likelihood of harm occurring to Fraser River sockeye as a result of salmon farms, the next question is whether the potential harm is serious or irreversible."

"I therefore conclude that the potential harm posed to Fraser River sockeye salmon from
salmon farms is serious or irreversible. Disease transfer occurs between wild and farmed fish, and I am satisfied that salmon farms along the sockeye migration route have the potential to introduce exotic diseases and to exacerbate endemic diseases that could have a negative impact on Fraser River sockeye."

Under 'Do current management measures ensure that the risk of serious or irreversible harm is minimal?' he states:

"Having concluded that there is some (at present unquantifiable) likelihood of harm to Fraser River sockeye from salmon farms, and that the potential harm is of a serious or irreversible nature, the next question is whether current management measures ensure that the risk of harm is minimal. As I noted above, based on the information before me, British Columbians will not tolerate more than a minimal risk of serious harm to Fraser River sockeye from salmon farms.

Not much doubt Judge Cohen heard valid "undisputed evidence that Fraser River sockeye face some likelihood of harm occurring from diseases and pathogens on salmon farms." His question is it already serious to the point of being irreversible."
 
Actually Agent, I was trying to point out that there are other sources of pathogens, and wondering why there isn't a large outcry on this board against those sources as well.

It never occured to me that I was involved in such subterfuge, while living in Ottawa.
 
How come no one commented on the other article I posted regarding the Fish Health studies getting uderway?

Isn't that what you all want? To find the big conspiracy cover up in the Fish Health files?
 
Ya caught me Andrew. I've been assigned by the Feds just to debate you guys on this forum.

or maybe I wake up early?

I thought so. It sure is interesting how 95% of your posts are between 8am and 5pm ET....just saying. They consistently stop at 2pm PST, just very strange times for someone that is out west and not doing this on the clock. Early to bed and early to rise makes one healthy, wealthy, happy and wise.......but that is sure some dedication to the topic to wake up at 430 every morning and hammer on it.
 
Probably not commenting because no one holds out great hope from the current Government's control of all information and then if it suits their agenda selectively release data. Just look at the Gateway Pipeline proposal. Controlled Community Hall Hearings via speakerphone so no bad press or protest clips are not winning over Public Support so they just change the channel and are now going to release specific environmental data to the public to see if that might work.
 
We all know what's going on, so why waste our time debating a few paid pro salmon feed lot workers, grasping at straws?
 
We all know what's going on, so why waste our time debating a few paid pro salmon feed lot workers, grasping at straws?
I'll admit that it is painfully tiring taking the time to research and respond to every PR talking point that media shrills get paid to think of – but it's in the interest of keeping honest communication and the proper functioning of democracy and public oversight that I think we MUST persevere to find the truths that are available out here in the digital world.

Many people don't have the scientific or political background, or experience to be able to use critical thinking skills and analyze the information presented to them in the media. That is where I see the strength of this forum – for those committed to understanding the issues – they will google and find this forum and others similar forums and read the issues and the arguments.

The readership on here is comprised of many caring, committed individuals with extensive backgrounds in certain diverse areas and contribute much to these conversations that we need to have about our collective future.

I also personally benefit from the discussions on this forum, as I get to see and understand other's points of view. It also helps me stay current and prepared for the lies that are constantly headed my way.

It's obvious pro-industry hacks also recognize the dangers truth has on their effectiveness and I welcome their input here as we all benefit from a complete airing of lies, and half-truths. I'm also grateful others have more patience than I do at times wrt responding to every Orwellian industry/DFO talking note.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Actually Agent, I was trying to point out that there are other sources of pathogens, and wondering why there isn't a large outcry on this board against those sources as well.

It never occured to me that I was involved in such subterfuge, while living in Ottawa.
Not sure how it works in Ottawa – but on the coasts – bilges are typically potential sources of hydrocarbon contamination; not diseases. Water from processing plants and from cultured and wild fish however – a different story.
 
How come no one commented on the other article I posted regarding the Fish Health studies getting uderway?

Isn't that what you all want? To find the big conspiracy cover up in the Fish Health files?
Identifying existing diseases and generating understanding of prevalences and virulity factors is long overdue. Tracking and proving that potential for past transfer from fish farms to wild stocks is difficult and likely impossible given the 30 year gap in monitoring this transfer and proper, responsible oversight.

Given how the Harper government has been actively muzzling everyone from elected representatives to scientists and all the way down to librarians – nobody trusts the government and the officials to be open, honest and/or transparent.

I respect and admire Miller Riddell, BUT they have bosses and communications departments who take orders from the corrupt PMOs office- which actively interfere in the proper functioning of democracy.

I'm pleased the work is beginning, outraged over the collusion and corruption in the upper levels of DFO and the government, and suspicious that this is nothing more than another political move to appear to be doing something – which is admitted better than doing nothing – but how will that data be made available?

What is the next steps for action when they generate these data? More delay and stalling? There's no process identified as how to use these data in regulating the industry and it appears that there is no intent to do so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Identifying existing diseases and generating understanding of prevalences and virulity factors is long overdue. Tracking and proving that potential for past transfer from fish farms to wild stocks is difficult and likely impossible given the 30 year gap in monitoring this transfer and proper, responsible oversight.

Given how the Harper government has been actively muzzling everyone from elected representatives to scientists and all the way down to librarians – nobody trusts the government and the officials to be open, honest and/or transparent.

I respect and admire Miller Riddell, BUT they have bosses and communications departments who take orders from the corrupt PMOs office- which actively interfere in the proper functioning of democracy.

I'm pleased the work is beginning, outraged over the collusion and corruption in the upper levels of DFO and the government, and suspicious that this is nothing more than another political move to appear to be doing something – which is admitted better than doing nothing – but how will that data be made available?

What is the next steps for action when they generate these data? More delay and stalling? There's no process identified as how to use these data in regulating the industry and it appears that there is no intent to do so.

Be patient agent... the science will unfold and in the meantime commercial, sports and FN fishers will take their toll/share/negotiated chunk of available wild salmon; fish habitat will continue to be lost, and more people will inhabit this place, warming the planet a bit more.

There is good news though, and that is nobody is going to tell Brian Riddell what to say or do and that's probably why he left DFO.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top