Going to Court to Stop Spread of Disease (Part 2 of 2)

[Whole in the Water]

These transfer conditions do not appear to require proof that the juvenile farm salmon have been tested for diseases or viruses before transfer. The licence does not explain "risk." Risk to shareholders, the other salmon in the pens or the wild salmon?
Money
By the time a farm-load of 600,000 to 1,000,000 Atlantic salmon is ready for transfer from a hatchery into marine net pens for grow out to harvest, the company has spent millions rearing them for a year in tanks on land. Each one has been injected with a vaccine to protect them from some diseases. If they can't be transferred into the ocean pens because of disease all that money is lost, as well as, the profits from the harvest.

Salmon farms are private businesses. Unfortunately they use public or common waters to flush all their waste and that means what goes on inside the pens has potential to affect the wild fish outside the pens. The legal mandate of a private company is to put the needs of the shareholder to make money first. This means the primary focus of the people working on the farm is the profitability of the farm itself. The legal mandate of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans includes conservation and management of the public fishery, including the protection of the marine environment on which the public fish depend. So why has the Minister of Fisheries stepped back from this crucial decision?

Risk
Marine Harvest’s lawyers suggest the entire BC farmed salmon industry would be shut down if they could no longer use piscine reovirus infected fish. Therefore, it is important to them that the court believes piscine reovirus does not cause disease. Piscine reovirus is at the center of this test case, but the resulting decision will impact farm salmon infected with any virus or bacteria.
Piscine reovirus appears to cause heart damage in farmed salmon in Norway. Scientists warn a wild salmon infected with the virus might not be able to swim up a river, or even reach the river. If piscine reovirus affects Pacific salmon this way, the risk to Canada is incalculable. There is already evidence it is spreading in BC. BC government pathologist, Dr. Gary Marty reported he could not detect piscine reovirus in young wild salmon in the Broughton Archipelago in 2008 (Saksida et al 2012), but it is common to find it there today (my work, ongoing).
In Norway, non-government scientists have access to farmed salmon, but in Canada scientists who want to study farmed salmon have to buy them in the supermarket where the organs have been removed, so research is limited. One of the very few labs with access to BC farmed salmon is the BC Ministry of Agriculture's Animal Health Centre in Abbottsford. This lab has been responsible for the quarterly provincial farm salmon health audits that examine farmed salmon that have died. The pathologist at the Animal Health Centre has reported diagnostic symptoms of the disease associated with piscine reovirus, called HSMI, but inexplicably they do not believe it is HSMI. This does not make sense and deserves explanation. Download HSMI-type Lesion Reporting in BC
Cohen Commission
In his final report on the Inquiry into the Decline of the Sockeye Salmon in the Fraser River, Justice Bruce Cohen warned that the potential harm posed to Fraser River sockeye from salmon farm is serious or irreversible. He concluded that disease transfer occurs between wild and farmed fish, and he was satisfied that salmon farms along the sockeye migration routes have the potential to introduce exotic diseases and to exacerbate endemic diseases that could have a negative impact on Fraser River sockeye.
Further, he found that the risk of disease to wild fish has not been adequately studied. This is painfully clear with piscine reovirus, a highly infectious virus, associated with devastating impact on salmon health. No on knows what is happening to wild salmon that have been exposed to massive farm salmon populations infected with piscine reovirus. Maybe it is killing them, maybe it makes them too slow to catch food, or escape from whales, maybe it is doing nothing. "Maybe" is just not good enough when it comes to Canada's wild salmon. They feed over 100 species, support coastal and interior economies, they feed the trees that make the oxygen we breathe and pull the carbon that is causing climate change out of our atmosphere.
Your Attendance
I am very grateful for my legal team, for their brilliance and hard work in preparation for this, their workload is enormous. You can sit in on the proceedings June 11-13 in federal court, 701 W. Georgia St., Vancouver. Please respect the court, do not use your phone, laptop or any electronic device while in the building, turn your phone "mute." If you want to take notes use a pen and paper and if you want to post, tweet or email you can step outside.
I am hoping we can stop the spread of disease from farm salmon to protect the wild salmon of the Northeastern Pacific Ocean.




- See more at: http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/a....GtptOQyS.dpuf

 

[rockdog]

Thanks for the post. I wish her the best......

 

[jeffywestcoast]

I wish Alex and her team at Eco-justice all the best ! Keep up the good work !

 

[seascene]

I am sailing the Broughtons now. It is possible that the wild runs in this awe inspiring scenery could be killed off. Greed never sleeps. Alaska will have nothing to do with salmon farms and have salmon abundance like the old days. BC liberals and DFO must be bought off to risk killing off our wild fishery on such a massive scale. Boundaries do not apply to a deadly virus. Alaska and Oregon would sue knowing that BC liberals and DFO were fully aware and fully ignored the risk of fish farms. Hopefully there is still time .... good luck Alex.

 

[agentaqua]

from: http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/

Marine Harvest's Lawyers Speak
June 12 was Marine Harvest’s lawyers turn to present their arguments to the court.

Their first presentation to the judge was about piscine reovirus. Piscine reovirus is important only because the test case that gave rise to this legal action was the transfer of infected juvenile Atlantic salmon from the Dalrymple hatchery in Sayward into a net pen salmon farm on the Fraser sockeye migration route off northern Vancouver Island.

Marine Harvest’s lawyer told the judge that piscine reovirus does not come from the salmon farm sites, it comes from the wild salmon and does not kill salmon in BC.

Their lawyer went on to say Marine Harvest has disproven the link between piscine reovirus and the disease, HSMI (which Marine Harvest lists as the #2 killer of their fish worldwide in their 2012 Annual General Report).

Marine Harvest said it is Dr. Gary Marty “opinion” is that piscine reovirus is not a disease agent.

Dr. Marty is a pathologist hired by the province of BC. He is not a licenced veterinarian in BC, his “opinion” has not been published and contradicts research papers published by government, academic and company scientists in Norway. This work is an outlier made public only in this courtroom.

The study of piscine reovirus is only 4 years old, it is an emerging science. Are we really going to allow it to multiple and mutate in salmon farms of 1,000,000 Atlantic salmon on the migration routes of wild salmon throughout the southern half of BC based on the opinion of a BC government pathologist?

Here is a short video Twyla Roscovich made when this case was filed a year ago. http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/ http://www.salmonconfidential.ca/lawsuit/

However, as I said piscine reovirus is not what this case is actually about. It is about is the federal aquaculture licences granted to salmon farms operating in BC and specifically whether this licence needs to be rewritten to stop permitting the transfer of diseased salmon from hatcheries to salmon farms in the ocean.

The lawyers for the Minister of Fisheries and Marine Harvest both made a point to tell the judge that while some diseased fish can be transferred to net pens under the federal licence that fish showing signs of clinical disease could not.

Actually this was true for the 2012 Licence I brought to the attention of the courts, but the new licence issued this year… months after filing this legal challenge has been changed.

Here is the 2013 Licence – note the red text:

3. Transfer of Fish

3.1 The licence holder may transfer to this facility live Atlantic or Pacific salmonids from a facility possessing a valid aquaculture licence issued pursuant to section 3 of the Pacific Aquaculture Regulations between the Fish Health zones described in Appendix VI, provided transfers occur within the same salmonid transfer zone as outlined in Appendix II and provided:

(a) the species of live salmonid fish are the same as those listed on the face of this licence;

(b) the licence holder has obtained written and signed confirmation, executed by the source facility’s veterinarian or fish health staff, that, in their professional judgement:

(i) mortalities, excluding eggs, in any stock reared at the source facility have not exceeded 1% per day due to any infectious diseases, for any four consecutive day period during the rearing period;

(ii) the stock to be moved from the source facility shows no signs of clinical disease requiring treatment; and

(iii) no stock at the source facility is known to have had any diseases listed in Appendix IV; or

(iv) where conditions 3.1 (b)(i) and/or 3(b)(iii) cannot be met transfer may still occur if the facility veterinarian has conducted a risk assessment of facility fish health records, review of diagnostic reports, evaluation of stock compartmentalization, and related biosecurity measures and deemed the transfer to be low risk.



Here is the 2014 LICENCE



3. Transfer of Fish

3.1 The licence holder may transfer fish to this facility from another facility possessing a valid aquaculture licence issued pursuant to section 3 of the Pacific Aquaculture Regulations provided that the following conditions are met:

(a) the fish are live Atlantic or Pacific salmonids;

(b) the species of live salmonid fish are the same as those listed on the face of this licence;

(c) transfers occur within the same Salmonid Transfer Zone as described in Appendix II; and

(d) the licence holder has obtained written and signed confirmation, executed by the source facility’s veterinarian, fish health staff, or facility manager, that, in their professional judgement:

(i) mortalities, excluding eggs, in any stock reared at the source facility have not exceeded 1% per day due to any infectious diseases, for any four consecutive day period during the rearing period;

(ii) the stock to be moved from the source facility shows no signs of clinical disease; and

(iii) no stock at the source facility is known to have had any diseases listed in Appendix III.

. 3.2 Where any or all conditions set in paragraph 3.1 (d) (i), (ii), (iii) cannot be met, transfer may still occur if the facility’s veterinarian has conducted a risk assessment considering facility fish health records, diagnostic reports, an evaluation of stock compartmentalization and related biosecurity measures, and deemed the transfer to be low risk.

In 2013, only clauses i and ii could be overridden by the facility veterinarian. Today, in 2014 clauses i, ii and iii can be ignored.

It was very hard to hear the lawyers tell the court that fish showing sign of clinical disease were not being transferred.

We have one more day of court, then the wait until the judge makes his decision.

I want to express my deepest thanks to my legal team from Ecojustice, an environmental non-profit law firm. I am very lucky they took this case. They poured time and effort into this, they are extremely well-prepared and more than held their own against the government and Marine Harvest lawyers (the biggest salmon farming company in the world).


- See more at: http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/#sthash.0ClFjePX.dpuf

 

[Birdsnest]

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/species-especes/aq-health-sante/prv-rp-eng.html

If they win their case I suspect you can kiss a large LARGE portion of coastal hatchery production GOOD BYE for the same reason. To think that hatchery production has been happening virus free for all these years would be incorect. Also I believe the case is about a virus and not so much of the disease if you take the time to read the link posted above.

 

[agentaqua]

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/species-especes/aq-health-sante/prv-rp-eng.html

If they win their case I suspect you can kiss a large LARGE portion of coastal hatchery production GOOD BYE for the same reason. To think that hatchery production has been happening virus free for all these years would be incorect. Also I believe the case is about a virus and not so much of the disease if you take the time to read the link posted above.

As far as I am aware BN - hatchery stock is tested for IHN and a few other endemic bacterial and viral diseases - not commonly including introduced diseases of probable net-cage introduction like ISA and PRV. In addition, most fry released from captured hatchery broodstock go back to their natal streams. The few rare examples where this doesn't happen - there is a risk assessment including disease testing.

AND what happens during stocking open net-pens - in comparison???

 

[agentaqua]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DH4eP20yuYk

 

[ClayoquotKid]

If Atlantic's were introduced to the Pacific over 100 years ago, and there are samples from '77 showing the presence of PRV - how can you realistically claim salmon farms are the source?
In addition to that, the tie between PRV and HSMI in the Atlantic is tenuous at best, and HSMI has never been seen on this coast.
Ms. Morton continues to stretch her fearmongering storyline thinner and thinner, and only the most dedicated farm haters are able to ignore the obvious in support of her theories.
Another huge cost to the taxpayer entertaining a single-track activist with a terrible record when it comes to supporting her crusade with scientific evidence.

 

[Whole in the Water]

Thanks for your graphic CK. Here's some back at ya!

and my personal favourite that sums up most of the problems with the foreign owned, salmon feedlot industry...

 

[agentaqua]

If Atlantic's were introduced to the Pacific over 100 years ago, and there are samples from '77 showing the presence of PRV..

Since - as far as I understand it - nobody has yet tested for PRV on the West Coast - CFIA refuses to - I'd like to see that alleged data, CK. Do you have it? If you don't look CK - you don't find.

In addition to that, the tie between PRV and HSMI in the Atlantic is tenuous at best, and HSMI has never been seen on this coast.

Also your assertion that the relationship between PRV and HSMI is "tenuous at best" may be the fish farm layers best defense - but is NOT supported in the science. In fact just the opposite is found in the literature:
http://www.virologyj.com/content/pdf/1743-422X-10-230.pdf
www.veterinaryresearch.org/content/pdf/1297-9716-43-27.pdf
www.nr.no/~aldrin/artikler/FishDiseasePrevet09.pdf

 

[ClayoquotKid]

Since - as far as I understand it - nobody has yet tested for PRV on the West Coast - CFIA refuses to - I'd like to see that alleged data, CK. Do you have it? If you don't look CK - you don't find. Also your assertion that the relationship between PRV and HSMI is "tenuous at best" may be the fish farm layers best defense - but is NOT supported in the science. In fact just the opposite is found in the literature:
http://www.virologyj.com/content/pdf/1743-422X-10-230.pdf
www.veterinaryresearch.org/content/pdf/1297-9716-43-27.pdf
www.nr.no/~aldrin/artikler/FishDiseasePrevet09.pdf

You see 'Aqua, here's the thing - People HAVE been testing for PRV on the Westcoast, and it has not been shown that the virus causes HSMI (certainly compelling evidence would be the presence of PRV on the coast for decades without any cases of HSMI being seen), although higher levels of the virus have been seen in fish with HSMI in the Atlantic.

HSMI happens independently from PRV, therefore it would appear that the virus is not the cause of the disease - many other factors come into play.

http://wfrc.usgs.gov/fieldstations/hq/viruspdf/piscinereovirus05272014.pdf
"More research is required but it is very clear that the presence of PRV in fish tissues alone cannot be used to diagnose HSMI"

http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/species-especes/aq-health-sante/prv-rp-eng.html
"PRV was first detected on the West Coast of North America through RT-PCR tests from farmed Chinook Salmon (Oncorhynchus tshawytscha) collected in British Columbia (K.M. Miller [Aquaculture Collaborative Research and Development Program project “Genomic characterization of jaundice-associated mortality events in cultured Chinook Salmon” conducted from 2011-2012]). Since that time, additional survey work through various labs and agencies in Canada and the United States has expanded the known host range of PRV to include: wild Cutthroat Trout (Oncorhynchus clarkii), wild Chinook Salmon, wild Sockeye Salmon (O. nerka), wild Steelhead Trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss), wild Coho Salmon (Oncorhynchus kisutch), wild Chum Salmon (Oncorhynchus keta) and farmed Atlantic Salmon. These species have all tested positive for PRV through molecular testing."

"The literature" provided presents theories about the linkage, but once again, reality and observations step in to cast significant doubt about their conclusions.

In fact, the "o" in "Reo"virus commonly stands for "orphan", because they are not usually associated with a disease.

I see you found a pic of me - that was the first fish I came across doing weight samples that was over 8kg, after 14 months in the 'chuck.

Happy, healthy, beautiful farmed salmon - I'm quite proud to have raised them, and just as proud to represent them in forums such as this.

Have a super day.

 

[fogged in]

Happy, healthy, beautiful farmed salmon - I'm quite proud to have raised them, and just as proud to represent them in forums such as this.

Have a super day.[/QUOTE]

I find it hard to understand Kayoquot Kid how you can say you are proud to be part of a disease riddled industry that is such a threat to our wild salmon.
Can only think it's the "I'm ok" mentality and the rest of the world can go to hell.
You do a lousy job of representing your employers in this form.
If I employed you I would tell you to shut up, cash your pay cheque and do what we pay your for.
You do nothing for the Fish Farm propaganda machine other than make people more committed to fight your disgusting feed lots.
Keep up the good work in that regard!

 

[fishnwhenIcan]

I'm sure I'm not the only one really sick of the Salmon Farm BS! Can you please take it elsewhwere CK. We care about our fish here. I know you need a paycheque but....can't you find something else. Karma can be a *****!

 

[Dave]

This site is certainly entertaining, lol! Good on ya CK, nice looking salmo

 

[fishnwhenIcan]

This site is certainly entertaining, lol! Good on ya CK, nice looking salmo

You figure out the life cycle of a pink yet Dave? Or should we look back to one of you're classic idiotic responses. Is CK you're Boss or do you just like to kiss up.

 

[goenfishin]

This site is certainly entertaining, lol! Good on ya CK, nice looking salmo

is that all you can contribute Dave in support of your love for fish farms?

 

[ClayoquotKid]

If you guys want a hater echo-chamber you are welcome to it - it's called "On your boat."

 

[fishnwhenIcan]

If you guys want a hater echo-chamber you are welcome to it - it's called "On your boat."

Why don't you go to a pro feedlot site? Oh wait a minute, I guess you wouldn't get paid for that! The rest of us are here because we want to be here. How about you stop putting our wild stocks at risk while you try to argue how they might survive your industry. I don't like like the results when you're wrong!

 

[Samnjoe]

It is sad that there are even a few members on this forum that are pro feed lot farming.
Thankfully the vast majority of sport fishermen are clearly anti fish farm.
Just ask around the docks and see how many fish farm supporters you can find.