Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
Thank you Alexandra for your tireless fight on our behalf - keep up the good work. Now would be a good time to help Alex out with some financial help as court cases are very expensive.
Going to Court to Stop Spread of Disease Is Canada's Aquaculture Licence Safe for Wild Salmon?
Canada would like us to believe the licence they grant to salmon farmers uses the best science and the most rigourous regulations to manage salmon farms. But it is hard to see it that way when it appears their Federal Aquaculture Licence allows transfer of farm salmon that are carrying disease pathogens into net pens right on the migration routes of BC's wild salmon. Hard to believe, I know.
The transfer conditions in the Federal Aquaculture Licences puts decisions about whether infected farm salmon smolts will go into net pens in wild salmon habitat in the hands of fish farm staff and fish farm's veterinarians. Is this safe for wild salmon when these company employees simply do not have the same ability or responsibility to consider and conserve wild salmon as government?
If DFO acted consistently with its responsibility to conserve the wild salmon - a responsibility described by Justice Bruce Cohen as DFO's paramount responsibility - then DFO would evaluate each and every transfer of young farmed fish from hatcheries into open net pens. The Minister would also look at a virus like piscine reovirus, reported to spread like "wildfire," infect red blood cells and damage salmon heart muscle and she would do everything in her power to contain it, prevent it from spreading through the North Pacific, at least until it impacts were well understood. Instead, the Minister has handed away this important decision about what fish get put into a salmon in the ocean to the salmon farming companies themselves.
And so June 11-13 we ask the courts to decide: Does the Minister of Fisheries have the authority to give the power to transfer fish to fish farm companies? Is the federal aquaculture licence inconsistent with federal fisheries law including section 56 of the Fishery (General) Regulations* and therefore contrary to law.
You are welcome to attend, see below.
I initiated this legal action over a year ago, after learning that Marine Harvest had transferred juvenile Atlantic salmon infected with piscine reovirus from its Dalrymple hatchery in Sayward to its net pen facility in Shelter Bay (see blog post). Shelter Bay is located at the north end of the passage between Vancouver Island and mainland BC. This means most wild salmon from southern BC will migrate past this farm. There is no reason to believe this particular transfer was unique, it is simply one that I learned about. This is a test case. My lawyers are Margo Venton and Lara Tessaro of Ecojustice, a non-profit law firm.
A test case. The Transfer Condition is part of the standard form aquaculture licence condition template approved by DFO in November 2012. These conditions are in all 123 federal aquaculture licences issued for 2013. The decision from this legal challenge could affect all salmon farms in British Columbia.
Below is the exact text of the licence condition that is now before the Court. Note that the apparent restriction on the transfer of disease-carrying fish from freshwater hatcheries to marine net pen sites, can be over-ruled by the final condition 3.1 (iv).
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, <nobr>Review</nobr> of diagnostic reports, evaluation of stock compartmentalization, and related biosecurity measures and deemed the transfer to be low risk.
Clause (iv) puts the health of wild salmon outside the pens in the hands of the facility veterinarian, and appears to allow that vet to make the choice whether to put a fish with a disease as defined in Appendix IV into the ocean, see below.
Going to Court to Stop Spread of Disease Is Canada's Aquaculture Licence Safe for Wild Salmon?
Canada would like us to believe the licence they grant to salmon farmers uses the best science and the most rigourous regulations to manage salmon farms. But it is hard to see it that way when it appears their Federal Aquaculture Licence allows transfer of farm salmon that are carrying disease pathogens into net pens right on the migration routes of BC's wild salmon. Hard to believe, I know.
The transfer conditions in the Federal Aquaculture Licences puts decisions about whether infected farm salmon smolts will go into net pens in wild salmon habitat in the hands of fish farm staff and fish farm's veterinarians. Is this safe for wild salmon when these company employees simply do not have the same ability or responsibility to consider and conserve wild salmon as government?
If DFO acted consistently with its responsibility to conserve the wild salmon - a responsibility described by Justice Bruce Cohen as DFO's paramount responsibility - then DFO would evaluate each and every transfer of young farmed fish from hatcheries into open net pens. The Minister would also look at a virus like piscine reovirus, reported to spread like "wildfire," infect red blood cells and damage salmon heart muscle and she would do everything in her power to contain it, prevent it from spreading through the North Pacific, at least until it impacts were well understood. Instead, the Minister has handed away this important decision about what fish get put into a salmon in the ocean to the salmon farming companies themselves.
And so June 11-13 we ask the courts to decide: Does the Minister of Fisheries have the authority to give the power to transfer fish to fish farm companies? Is the federal aquaculture licence inconsistent with federal fisheries law including section 56 of the Fishery (General) Regulations* and therefore contrary to law.
You are welcome to attend, see below.
I initiated this legal action over a year ago, after learning that Marine Harvest had transferred juvenile Atlantic salmon infected with piscine reovirus from its Dalrymple hatchery in Sayward to its net pen facility in Shelter Bay (see blog post). Shelter Bay is located at the north end of the passage between Vancouver Island and mainland BC. This means most wild salmon from southern BC will migrate past this farm. There is no reason to believe this particular transfer was unique, it is simply one that I learned about. This is a test case. My lawyers are Margo Venton and Lara Tessaro of Ecojustice, a non-profit law firm.
A test case. The Transfer Condition is part of the standard form aquaculture licence condition template approved by DFO in November 2012. These conditions are in all 123 federal aquaculture licences issued for 2013. The decision from this legal challenge could affect all salmon farms in British Columbia.
Below is the exact text of the licence condition that is now before the Court. Note that the apparent restriction on the transfer of disease-carrying fish from freshwater hatcheries to marine net pen sites, can be over-ruled by the final condition 3.1 (iv).
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, <nobr>Review</nobr> of diagnostic reports, evaluation of stock compartmentalization, and related biosecurity measures and deemed the transfer to be low risk.
Clause (iv) puts the health of wild salmon outside the pens in the hands of the facility veterinarian, and appears to allow that vet to make the choice whether to put a fish with a disease as defined in Appendix IV into the ocean, see below.
