Fish Farm trouble in BC.

Discussion in 'Conservation, Fishery Politics and Management.' started by Chuck, Oct 10, 2017.

  1. Whole in the Water

    Whole in the Water Well-Known Member

    bones said:
    come on Tubber Morton is a commercially fund by US Big business, you still believe her circus train?
    Click to expand...

    What about the many published, peer reviewed, scientific research papers that come from scientist around the world? They are not all funded by big corporate interests. If you need a list of them search the many articles found in previous posts on this forum.

    Curious as to what big business are funding Morton's research? Can you list them here for us to see?

    The canned tuna industry? The chicken, pork, beef or tofu industry? (i.e. trying to increase their market share in the protein sector?).

    What big corporations benefit by moving net pen farms onto the land ? Be interesting to see this!

    Hey Bones you are not the only one waiting for a reply - still waiting for an answer on this one ....
     
    Last edited: Nov 10, 2017
  2. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    hey Dave how is it that sealice infect fish leaving and not returning? why is it that salmon caught say south of the broughton are not covered in lice? do they swim through some magic potion when out in the sea? if farmed fish hold or alter sealice to these huge numbers they speak of then how is it that all the salmon i've caught south of the broughton over the last 40 years only have acceptable amounts?
     
  3. bones

    bones Well-Known Member


    idk whole........ how is it people here can say the same thing about the fish farming industry with out listing them? it been said many time that the system is corrupt and it all about the money. big business handing out money to shut ones eyes..... how can the anti fish farmer make such accusation with out evidence but when one person says it here all of a sudden you need proof?
     
  4. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    Reasonably easy answer, Bones: "survivor bias" wrt juvies to returning adults - meaning the overly infected smolts died along the way.

    For those returning, now adult survivors - there is a length of time wrt when an infective copepodid stage manages to attach to a host and develops into a subadult and adult stages - dependent upon water temperature - but measured in weeks. Adult fish can swim fairly quickly through an area - 50+km/d: http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/z88-322

    Adults don't hang around the areas containing the fish farms for weeks to months in order to grow big enough to hit the ocean - like the juvies.

    In addition, adult salmon can swim fairly deep when they want to - unlike the juvies - and that may offer additional protection from the copoedite stages of sea lice.

    Having said that - I have caught adult coho in the ocean with what looks like small bumps/pimples on them. I imagine other posters have also. I believe that to be a inflammatory response to a sea lice infestation of the copeditite stages.

    And in determining what an "acceptable" amount of sea lice are wrt host morbidity/mortality - it should be listed as # motile adult stages per gram of host weight. For juvies they are like 1000 times smaller than adults by weight - so can only take like just over ~1 lice.

    So, good questions, Bones.
     
    terrin, california and bigdogeh like this.
  5. Whole in the Water

    Whole in the Water Well-Known Member

    One needs accurate data and facts to make accurate determinations and decisions about something - one can have much less to simply form an opinion. Just wanted to know if what you were saying was based on any reliable information and/or facts backed by data. Sounds like it isn't - just another personal opinion. Thanks for being honest about it.
     
    bones likes this.
  6. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    O ok, salmon only get infected when swimming in one direction. Cant get infected when swimming the other direction.
     
  7. bigdogeh

    bigdogeh Well-Known Member

    at least it sounds like you are accepting the fact that they can be infected... lol,
     
  8. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    It always seems a bizarre concept that FF proponents/pundits/PR people can readily accept the fact that the Atlantic smolts come from a FW hatchery - and get their lice from the environment (wild fish, other FFs) - BUT! - that transfer can only happen 1 way - INTO the pens - and not OUT (let alone in elevated levels to infect sensitive juvie wild salmon) - and even though the name says it all : "OPEN" net pens (i.e. water flows IN AND OUT). Kinda boggles the mind - that ill-logic....
     
    Last edited: Nov 14, 2017 at 12:32 PM
    bigdogeh likes this.
  9. bigdogeh

    bigdogeh Well-Known Member

    Anything to try to deflect or discredit the science and/or common sense. Doesn't seem they have a lot of either. Sadly our governments at many levels seem to follow their lead.
     
  10. Whole in the Water

    Whole in the Water Well-Known Member

    Our govt.'s at all levels unfortunately too often follow the money instead of what citizens want or what the environment needs IMO.
     
  11. bigdogeh

    bigdogeh Well-Known Member

    Agreed. They need to be held accountable. Not all countries act with that complete disregard...
     
  12. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    Ah, no. Nothing more than what happens to local infection. If pink salmon can swim around fully infected then why not or why are Chinook or Coho wild adults not infected? Science paper explains why. Has nothing to so with size or they swim through the area to fast.
    If sea lice are killing wild salmon then were are all the dead salmon or.... Were is a beach seine showing proof that links all your papers to the death of pacific salmon? Or just any evidence?

    I find the anti fish farms people very closed minded individuals. Here newest science papers and studies show dead wild smolts in the poop of predators. Not only can the tell what's in the poop. They can size the smolt, run classification, and how many are dieing in the strait. The studies have been happening for 10 years and people are still stuck on fish farms. So stuck or bent on removing fish farms from th ocean you choose to ignore science and attack the industry on every level possible. Disease, sewage, bottom loading, catching fish in the ocean and feeding them to farmed, etc....

    I just sit here and look at all the work done and the "fish farm did It ended years and years ago"

    If you would like to step on one they offer tours in the early summer before the farm gets to busy. I believe the leave from Campbell river.
     
  13. Whole in the Water

    Whole in the Water Well-Known Member

    Hi Bones would you like to respond to the questions, issues and concerns raised in the article below - with peer reviewed published scientific research? (as anything less is just personal opinion and limited observations and just boils down just personal bias). This is just one article that references one of many peer reviewed research publications that detail the negative environmental impacts of net pen fish farming. If you don't like this article you could chose one the of the many that AA and others have posted on previous pages of this very post. This should be easy for one to do as you say above "I just sit here and look at all the work done and the "fish farm did It ended years and years ago". Seems like it should be a simple thing to do for any open minded individual/fish farm supporter.

    As of yet no fish farm supporter on the forum has chosen to respond. Not sure if it is because they don't care about the negative impact their industry has or if they are unable to?
    _________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
    Hello forum Fish Farm Supporters above is a very interesting article that raises some serious concerns about net pen salmon farms. To better understand both side of the debate it would be helpful if fish farm supporters on this forum were to please provide some reasoned critique, backed up with data for the following statements (article highlights) made in this article listed below:

    Please inform forum members of what you understand to be the truth around these issues listed below.
    • New research http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/related?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171471 by an international group of fishery scientists has detected a nasty heart disease, first identified in Norway, on a British Columbia fish farm in the Discovery Islands. And the study revealed that dying fish with similar heart lesions had been retrieved from other farms in the same region between 2011 and 2013
    • Second, the study not only confirmed the presence of HSMI in B.C. coastal waters — something industry and government have long denied — but showed a clear link between piscine reovirus (PRV) and the disease. “PRV was the only agent detected in heart tissue that was correlated with HSMI lesions in the heart,” the study found. And that’s a problem because the PRV has been present in B.C.’s industrial fish farms and hatcheries for years. Industry has long maintained not only that HSMI is not present in B.C., but that piscine reovirus behaves differently here and has not been established as a cause of the disease.
    • But the paper reports there have been numerous cases of HSMI-like lesions in farmed fish since 2002, and most were likely HSMI. And the study revealed that dying fish with similar heart lesions had been retrieved from other farms in the same region between 2011 and 2013
    • The study also explained why the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO), the industry regulator, probably failed to detect the disease: it didn’t sample enough fish or at the right time.
    • In addition, B.C. doesn’t use the international standard definition of HSMI for diagnosis, the study noted, instead using its own unique definition.
    • In 2013, provincial government fish pathologist Gary Marty stated in an affidavit used by Marine Harvest that “PRV is common in farmed Atlantic salmon and farmed Pacific salmon, but HSMI does not occur in B.C.”
    • But the study, which examined healthy, sick and dead fish from one farm over an 18-month period, confirmed that HSMI and PRV travel together even in B.C.
    • And in a 2016 presentation to a parliamentary committee, Kristi Miller, a respected DFO fish pathologist and one of the authors of the new study, noted that until recently, the DFO has shown little interest in researching impacts on wild fish while industry has often prevented access to farmed fish for disease studies. “At present, the department relies heavily on information that the industry provides to determine, for example, what pathogens and diseases to focus risk assessments on,” she told the committee. “There are not, to date, any provisions to enable scientists to conduct risk assessments to sample fish on farms unless the industry agrees to provide them.”
      Under Canadian law, it is illegal to transfer diseased or infected fish from holding pens or hatcheries into ocean waters in Canada — yet that’s now a daily reality in B.C.’s farmed fish industry.
    • In 2015 a federal judge ruled that DFO couldn’t download its responsibilities for fish health to the industry, letting corporations decide when and how to transfer diseased fish. In addition, the judge said the government must respect the precautionary principle and test all farmed fish prior to being transferred to ocean pens for the PRV virus.
    • Marine Harvest and the federal government appealed — the government later dropped its effort — and the practice continues.
    • About 80 per cent of farmed fish test positive for PRV, and that inconvenient reality is now the subject of another lawsuit launched last year by biologist and wild salmon advocate Alexandra Morton against the minister of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. Given the clarity of the law and the 2015 ruling, Morton wants the DFO to test farmed smolts for PRV before they are introduced to the ocean. Despite the 2015 federal court ruling, the DFO has refused to do so.
    Looking forward to some thoughtful replies back up with research and data and some interesting debates on this.
     
    agentaqua likes this.
  14. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    Could you please define the process" peer reviewed"?
     
  15. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    Most were likely HSMI...... idk something wrong it is or it isn't. This is an assumption or biased review.
     
  16. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    Really? What farm? Thought by law they were denied access to farms?
     
  17. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    But if your not granted access then how do you know 80% are infected?
     
  18. tincan

    tincan Well-Known Member

    @bones as you may know after much push back the SSHI (PSF, DFO's Miller, etc, Genome BC) were finally permitted to access samples from many fish farms in BC. These samples recently proved that HSMI is prevalent in open-net pens in BC and has been for some time. Some of the samples that tested positive for HSMI were 3, 4, 5 years old.... proving that the FF industry was hiding this from the public for years before they were finally forced to reluctantly provide samples to the SSHI study. THAT is how they were provided 'access' to farms and it took a long road to get there.
     
  19. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    With all the pitt tagging and tracking how is it that millions of smolts travel through and all you have is a jar with how many smolts 7? That have lice? Puzzled
     
  20. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    Yes
    yes but just responding to the words from above post...... Old news
     

Share This Page