Lawsuit Filed against DFO & Marine Harvest!!!

[ClayoquotKid]

CK: You've been quiet for a few days. Trip to Campbell River for grub and beer; with no internet?

What I mean is that w/o adequate oversight, some managers and companies will do things the cheap way. That is not specific to just the open net-pen industry. What "escaped" and what is a "mort" is only is what the farms report on paper. There is no way you can trust those numbers or trust farms to accurately and honestly to "voluntarily" report escapees. Numbers of fish in a pen are just a guestimate. You should already know that, CK - if you do work on the pens - but, maybe a media shrill would not have enough background to know this..

Yes, validating sports-caught fish is 1 other example that should *NOT* be used to justify unprofessional conduct by farm operations, or to deflect the conversation away from critiques of the open net-pen industry operations.

It doesn't even rate a "nice try", CK.

How do you explain that all 15 sites of Cooke Aquaculture were found to have used cypermethrin and impacted lobsters along with other crustaceans. That directive had to have come from a position in the company above a site manager, even. It also means that they are having a crises with resistance to Slice on their sea lice.

“Cooke used the pesticide to address a major sea lice infestation in their open pen salmon farm, knowing that it was illegal to do so,” Environment Canada officials wrote in the release.

Matthew Abbott of the St. Andrew’s, N.B., environmental watchdog group Fundy Baykeeper said: "It highlights how deep rooted the problem is,” he said of violation and resulting penalties. “Any ocean waters need to treated with great care. We’re not convinced the existing rules are adequate".

ya, I know the next thing you will be trying to get us to believe that this behaviour never happens anywheres else, or never at any time in the development of the industry, or or or...[insert disengenious deflective claim here]

Just a little context for all those on here without their "hater goggles" on (and mighty tightly, I might add).

There is no justification for unprofessional conduct anywhere - and the same goes for fishermen.

Your "critique" of the industry is more of a focused attack on many individuals whose character you seem constantly willing to call into question in your snarky ad hominem rants.

It seems this forum is more about you venting about something you don't like than actually discussing what the impacts to wild salmon are and how aquaculture might fit in.

I took a break because I didn't see anything worth responding to on here, just more of the same barking.

 

[rockdog]

Just remember ck, you decided to come to a sportfishing website, to try to promote salmon farming. You weren't asked to come on here.
It would be like me going to a Canucks party wearing a Marchand bruins jersey yapping about how great I thought the Bruins were. What do you think would happen to me? I think at first, they would politely argue and debate, but eventually, it would become clear that I'm not very well liked. I think that's where you are at.....

 

[Englishman]

Just a little context for all those on here without their "hater goggles" on (and mighty tightly, I might add).

Just a little context for those with their “economics above everything” goggles on. So tightly they cannot see anything else around them.

There is no justification for unprofessional conduct anywhere - and the same goes for fishermen.

So neatly ignoring the Cooke Aquaculture charges! Or was that not “unprofessional”? Of course things like that have never happened in the two decades plus operating on the BC coast have they? Easier to deflect and talk about angling. What a slippery response!!

Your "critique" of the industry is more of a focused attack on many individuals whose character you seem constantly willing to call into question in your snarky ad hominem rants.

Your spokesperson's critique of industry critics is always a focused attack on individuals who present data that shows up the industry shortcomings , by attacking their character and motives with vile comments and insinuations. The attacks on Morton and collaborators by your industry is disgusting. Your attack on Agent it typical of this posture.

It seems this forum is more about you venting about something you don't like than actually discussing what the impacts to wild salmon are and how aquaculture might fit in.

CK I will say it again. A number of links to papers documenting impacts to wild salmon have been posted here by Charlie and Agent. You never answer any of them except to quote Marine Harvest “opinions and positions” as though they were science! And the links posted previously here are just a small part of the evidence out there from all over the world. It is you who won’t discuss.

I took a break because I didn't see anything worth responding to on here, just more of the same barking.

Easier to ignore facts and pretend they don’t isn’t it?

 

[agentaqua]

Just because you dislike what I am relaying does not make my reposting of news stories of unethical and illegal behaviour in the open net-cage industry a: "snarky ad hominem rants.". Just because we disagree with your defensive, myoptic, indoctrinated views does not mean we "hate" you, CK. You're really not important enough for me to "hate" you.

From: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem

"Ad hominem is an attack on the person, not the person's arguments"

I have been challenging your arguments, CK - even though you apparently dislike it.

If you go back a few postings - you challenged me on the fact that I alluded to unethical behaviour in the industry by talking about lack of 3rd party monitoring in the open net-pen industry.

I then responded to your challenge by illustrating a real-life and known example of unethical and illegal behaviour - one where someone got caught for a change. The COs that charged Cooke were not making an "ad hominem" attack, neither. They were doing their job, CK.

You may dislike being proven wrong, even if you are good at it - but by then responding by posting: "I didn't see anything worth responding to on here" just demonstrates your immaturity and lack of interest in a debate even though you are on a open, public sportsfishing forum trying to defend your industry.

Grow-up CK.

 

[agentaqua]

When a farm is harvested out if the numbers don't add up it is investigated. You can't just have profit go missing - it is pretty simple actually, never mind all the other areas of regulation and eyes out there.

As I mentioned - the numbers of fish in a pen are a guestimate. You could easily loose several thousand and nobody would notice. You could loose several thousand and it might not be reported. You could loose many thousands if they were infected and unfit for processing aqnd consumption - and that would be an economic benefit to the farm, especially if the insurance paid for the loss.

Without 3rd party monitoring - only some of the employees might know about these things.

The fact that you seem to expect us to believe your post means either you expect us to not know these things, or worse: you don't.

Case in point below:

 

[agentaqua]

Escaped Salmon Could be Bad for Wild Salmon

CBC - NL

Escaped farmed salmon could cause problems, council warns
DFO says unlikely the fish had any disease or illness

Posted: May 16, 2013 3:28 PM NT

The Salmonid Council of Newfoundland and Labrador warns a recent escape of farmed salmon could cause problems with the wild Atlantic salmon population.

Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada officials confirmed this week that farmed salmon escaped from an aquaculture site in the Fortune Bay area, and have turned up in the Garnish River.

Council president Don Hutchens said it poses multiple threats to the wild salmon, such as potential interbreeding between wild and farmed salmon, and spreading of the infectious salmon anemia (ISA) virus.

He said the DFO is playing down the issue.

"We told them it was going to happen, they told us that we shouldn't fear about it, but there is no signs to say that we shouldn't fear," Hutchens said.

"In fact, what we do know is everywhere there's been a finfish farm agricultural site, wild Atlantic salmon populations have drastically declined," he added.

Hutchens said part of the problem is that the DFO does not report on escapes that it calls trickle escapes.

"We think that trickle escapes are quite significant — almost to the point that they're almost major escapes when they're done collectively. You could have up to a hundred salmon a day trickling out through the nets and escaping over the sides," Hutchens said.

"You add those up for the year, and you have quite a significant number of farmed salmon escaping into the wild."

No cause for concern, DFO says

Geoff Perry, with the regional aquaculture management of DFO, said there are no indicators to cause concern about spreading infection or disease to the wild population of the fish.

"The animals we sampled last week, we're running them through a full sweep of pathogen screening so we'll have some information on that in the next couple weeks," Perry said.

"But from what we visually looked at, these fish, there's no sea lice on them, and they're not exhibiting any signs of disease or external signs of disease," he added.

He said the fish likely got out during an increase in water levels during the fall or winter season.

"What's probably happened here is these fish got out some time over the winter during a storm, and eventually just poked their nose into a place where the environmental conditions were a little more favourable than the open ocean," Perry said.

However, Perry said there is concern that interbreeding will lead to a weaker generation of salmon in the wild.

"There's concern that if wild and farmed fish interbreed — that the resulting hybrids, farm-wild fish hybrids — will be less fit for the wild environment because farm salmon had been domesticated for traits that make them a very good food fish, but those same traits don't make for good survival in the wild, whereas wild fish have traits that make them very good to survive in the wild," Perry said.

Perry said they did not receive a report from any of the farms in the area, so they do not know which farm the fish escaped from.

Rare occurrence, association says

Cyr Couturier, the executive director of the Newfoundland Aquaculture Industry Association, repeats sentiments that the likelihood of ISA spreading is low.

"These are naturally occurring diseases that come from wild fish that are passed on to salmon in cages," Couturier said. "There's regular inspection and testing for that almost on a continuous basis by the government agencies and [Canadian Food Inspection Agency]."

Couturier also said that concern about interbreeding between wild and farmed salmon is low.

"This is one escape. It's not a huge escape, from what we can tell yet, and we don't think that there's going to be much interbreeding," he said. "We haven't seen it in 30 years in Newfoundland and Labrador."

Couturier said the association is doing an investigation to find out where exactly the fish escaped from.

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/newfoundland-labrador/story/2013/05/16/nl-salmon-escaped-dfo-516.html

 

[agentaqua]

Concerns Over Escaped NL Farmed Fish

Concerns over Escaped Farmed Fish in Newfoundland

Response to Cyr Couturier, CBC ‘Here and Now’, NL, Broadcast date: May 16th, 2013
May 22, 2013

Corner Brook, NL - Following the recent discovery of 25 farmed salmon in the Garnish River on the South coast, concerns over the interaction of farmed and wild salmon are mounting. The Atlantic Salmon Federation (ASF) is responding to comments made by Cyr Couturier, President of the Newfoundland Aquaculture Industry Association, aired on CBC’s ‘Here and Now’. ASF would like to counter Mr. Couturier’s misinformed attempt to dispel the public’s growing apprehension over the threats of open net pen salmon aquaculture to Newfoundland’s wild Atlantic salmon.

To begin, ASF questions the science behind Mr. Couturier’s statement, that farmed salmon are “exactly genetically identical” to their wild counterparts. Don Ivany, Regional Program Director for ASF in Newfoundland and Labrador comments, “Yes, it is true that wild and farmed salmon are similar enough to interbreed, as Mr. Couturier acknowledges; however these two fish are about as related as your family dog and a wild wolf.” Through domestication, the process by which farmers select and breed for desirable traits (e.g. fast growth, non-aggressive behavior etc), the industry has created a salmon that is desirable for farming and for eating; not for living in the wild environment. When these fish escape and breed with wild individuals, the resulting offspring are less ‘fit’ for their natural environment.

For example, research by McGinnity and others (2003) has shown that farmed-wild hybrids have higher egg mortality, lower juvenile survival, and lower survival at sea, compared to wild salmon.

The consequences of interbreeding between wild and farmed salmon does not “sometimes happen in the laboratory” as Mr. Couturier suggests, but rather is a well-documented phenomenon that has been demonstrated in a multitude of peer reviewed studies around the world, in both laboratory and field settings.

To provide a list of these publications here would be exhaustive, but interested readers can find a selection on ASF’s website (www.asf.ca). The findings reached by these studies are remarkably similar, and contrary to what Mr. Couturier would have you believe, increasing the genetic diversity of wild salmon populations through interbreeding with farmed salmon does not result in “better performance”. It results in offspring that are less likely to survive and reproduce.

Interestingly, Mr. Couturier is right in asserting that in Newfoundland “there is not a lot of evidence of interbreeding”; indeed, there have been few- if any- peer reviewed studies investigating these issues in Newfoundland that would provide such evidence. In other words, says Mr. Ivany, “if no one is looking, obviously no one will find any evidence; that doesn’t mean that the evidence isn’t there”.

The same can be said for research investigating the transmission of diseases between farmed and wild fish. There is a need for more rigorous monitoring and research to support statements like those made by Mr. Couturier that the transfer of diseases from farmed to wild fish “doesn’t typically happen”. In the case of the escaped farmed salmon found in the Garnish River, it is too soon to conclude that “these fish were healthy” and therefore posed no threat to wild fish, as the Department of Fisheries and Oceans has yet to complete their health testing of these fish.

Mr. Couturier is the face of the aquaculture industry in Newfoundland, and, of course, he is expected to represent and support the interests of that industry. However, these interests are often at odds with the interests and viewpoints held by the public, conservationists, and scientists. It is not just “some anglers with concerns” that salmon farming is detrimental to wild salmon populations. The respected scientists of the Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) and the Royal Society of Canada are also concerned that aquaculture is a significant threat to vulnerable wild Atlantic salmon, because of issues like interbreeding and disease.

Mr. Ivany is calling for more transparency in the industry with respect to escapes, including small-scale ‘trickle out’ escapes that add up over time. Currently, the industry is only required to report large escapes of greater than 100 fish. “We suspect industry and government are afraid to do the necessary research because they are afraid of what they will find. Up to the year 2001 it was confirmed that 209,800 farmed salmon and 216,953 steelhead/rainbow trout escaped from farms on the South coast. Yet the industry and governments are reluctant to provide the list of escapes to the public since then or even for the past few years”.

In the Coast of Bays Region, where these most recent escaped salmon were found, aquaculture production has more than tripled since 2003. As this most recent discovery of farmed fish in the Garnish River has shown, our current regulatory, monitoring and reporting system does not have the capabilities to estimate when, where, or how many farm fish are escaping into our ocean. In the face of such rapid growth, it is time for all of us to be concerned.

 

[Charlie]

John Fredriksen

Oh BTW… forgot to mention! Do ”YOU” know what Pan Fish; Marine Harvest; Geveran Trading; and 74% ownership of Fjord Seafood LLC (in 2005) “ALL” have in common” ?

The answer is - John Fredriksen:

Geveran Trading (100% Fredriksen) buys Domstein's 24% stake in Fjord Seafood.
Pan Fish (controlled by Fredriksen) announced that two companies (Pay Fish & Geveran Trading) indirectly controlled by Fredriksen had acquired a combined 48% of the company's outstanding shares of Fjord Seafood.

Geveran Trading buys Marine Harvest and before turning ownership over to Pan Fish Geveran sold its stake in Fjord Seafood to Pan Fish. Its remaining shares purchased by Pan Fish, Fjord Seafood is de-listed from the Oslo Stock Exchange. Wella… Your Atlantic open net fish farming has a lustrous God Father, and I really do mean he is YOUR – “GOD FATHER”, as in a real mafia type, as he is currently attempting to take over Cermeq.

“Moves toward consolidation in the aquaculture sector were sparked by the activity of shipping magnate John Fredriksen, Norway's richest man before abandoning his citizenship of the country in 2006.[SUP][38][/SUP] Fredriksen's first major move into the industry came in the second quarter of 2005, when Domstein's 24% stake in Fjord Seafood was sold to his investment vehicle Geveran Trading. Around the same time, Pan Fish announced that two companies indirectly controlled by Fredriksen had acquired a combined 48% of the company's outstanding shares.[SUP][40][/SUP] In October of that year, with salmon prices high,[SUP][41][/SUP] Fjord submitted an offer for a majority stake in Cermaq to the Norwegian Government, which was preparing it for a public listing. However, as with the first merger attempt in 2002, Fjord failed in its bid—this time the offer was rejected by the Government.

“Fredriksen's efforts to effect change finally bore fruit in March 2006, as Geveran Trading succeeded in purchasing Marine Harvest from its joint owners for €881 million, before immediately turning ownership over to Pan Fish.[SUP][43][44][/SUP] Geveran also sold its stake in Fjord Seafood to Pan Fish at the same time. With its remaining shares purchased by Pan Fish, Fjord Seafood de-listed from the Oslo Stock Exchange on 6 July 2006. With regulatory hurdles in the United Kingdom and France cleared, the Marine Harvest group was brought under the control of Pan Fish by the end of 2006. To allow the merger to go ahead, the sale of the former Pan Fish Scotland division was agreed with the regulatory authorities. After an initial deal to sell the unit to Norskott Havbruk, owners of rival company Scottish Sea Farms, was called off in July 2007, Pan Fish Scotland was spun off into a separate publicly traded entity, Lighthouse Caledonia, that November.

“Geveran Trading held a 28% stake in the company upon completion of the merger, a shareholding which has since increased to almost 30% as of March 2009.

“With the creation of a much enlarged company complete, the Pan Fish management announced a complete change in its identity in December 2006. The firm's new brand was chosen to reflect each of its three main constituents: "Marine Harvest" was again revived as the new name for the company, and the Fjord Seafood slogan "excellence in seafood" and a reworked version of the Pan Fish motif were also included in the new logo. Atle Eide, CEO of Pan Fish from 2003, continued in his position, but resigned in September 2007 for personal reasons. Eide was replaced on an interim basis by Leif Frode Onarheim, before the CEO position was filled permanently by former GE Healthcare executive Åse Aulie Michelet in March 2008. Michelet was unexpectedly removed from her position in March 2010 and was replaced by former Lerøy Seafood CEO Alf-Helge Aarskog.

Who is John Fredriksen?
“John Fredriksen, (born 10 May 1944) is a Norwegian-born Cypriot oil tanker and shipping tycoon, owner of the world's largest oil tanker fleet, and was Norway's richest man until he chose to abandon his Norwegian citizenship and take up a Cypriot passport. Norwegian magazine E24 listed Fredriksen in 2011 with a net worth of NOK 59,7 billion ($10.7 billion USD). Through his investment companies Hemen Holdings and Meisha, Fredriksen controls the companies Frontline and Golar LNG from London.

“He also has major interests in the offshore driller Seadrill, the fish farming company Marine Harvest the dry bulk company Golden Ocean Group, and supply vessel company Deep Sea Supply. Fredriksen's Frontline in 2010-11 owned 9,6% of another large tanker company Overseas Shipholding Group, but divested itself of this stake during 2011.

“Fredriksen made his fortune during the Iran-Iraq wars in the 1980s when his tankers picked up oil at great risk and huge profits. As described by his biographer, "he was the lifeline to the Ayatollah."

“In 1985 the Norwegian insurance company Gard got suspicious about losses of cargo from Fredriksen's tankers. A private investigation was initiated and a system for the use of heavy oil as bunker fuel was revealed. The case was turned over to the Norwegian police and in June 1986 Fredriksen's offices in Oslo were searched and several of his nearest associates, and after a while also Fredriksen, were placed in detention while the case was investigated.

“After several years of arguments between the various lawyers the case was settled out of court. Fredriksen had to pay a fine of 2 million NOK for risking his crew's life, and in addition had to pay the insurance company Gard an amount of over 800.000 USD.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Fredriksen

Yep… John Fredrick, like most other God Fathers ended up jailed for insurance fraud and did you note -”risking his crew’s life. Decides it is time to leave his country and really does want to control the entire world’s Atlantic salmon farming industry. This man doesn’t care about human life, let alone any environment. His only concern is power and MONEY. Truly, is the Atlantic fish farming industries - “God Father.”

Every one of you that are pro Norwegian Atlantic fish farming are supporting his efforts!

 

[ClayoquotKid]

As I mentioned - the numbers of fish in a pen are a guestimate. You could easily loose several thousand and nobody would notice. You could loose several thousand and it might not be reported. You could loose many thousands if they were infected and unfit for processing aqnd consumption - and that would be an economic benefit to the farm, especially if the insurance paid for the loss.

Without 3rd party monitoring - only some of the employees might know about these things.

The fact that you seem to expect us to believe your post means either you expect us to not know these things, or worse: you don't.

Case in point below:

Are you kidding me?

Your logic continues to astound me.

I am just shaking my head at your ability to believe that any business could run that way and expect to be successful.

Your disdain for the industry and refusal to acknowledge the ability and honour of its workers allows you to extrapolate any sort of scenario from your limited knowledge.

Do you know at what point feed rates can indicate a loss of fish? (Case in point below is hundreds of fish lost without any physical signs of damage - "leakage" in East coast storms using different systems than in BC)

Do you know what expectations there are for staff on a farm when it comes to accounting for the stock they are paid to take care of?

Do you know how many times in a week there are divers inspecting pens while collecting morts? (Yes, some of them die - usually less than 10% over the cycle - and they are all counted and discussed at meetings and reported to shareholders)

Do you have any idea of the competition that goes on between site managers and staff to have the best possible cycle - with the highest number of premium fish to market at the highest size and by using the least amount of feed and resources to get there?

No, I can quite assuredly say you must have no idea of any of those things because you seem to simply have an idea of aquaculture that you support through negative instances you have gathered over the years while ignoring the fact that thousands of hardworking and caring people are out there working towards farming salmon the in best possible way.

Just because you don't like it - it doesn't mean it is a bad thing.

Why don't you stick to showing me a link between farms and population declines?

Isn't that what this is all about?

You say farms harm wild salmon and I disagree?

 

[agentaqua]

and I wish I could also state that your responses astound me CK. They don't. They are the same tired old "nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong..." responses that I have come to expect from the so-called best liers for the industry - the shrills.

Of course there are good people in the industry, DFO, the NGOs, AND the public. Everyone of them is to a person - human. Falliable, tribal, emotional - everyone.

In order to communicate effectively - we need trust. In order to develop that trust - we need honesty.

Corporations are driven by greed, not social licence. They are commonly headed by high-functioning sociopaths. Honesty works against them.

They often hire media shrills (often lower functioning sociopathic bullies) to disseminate lies, half-truths and a running narrative: "nothing to see here - move along", "nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong...", "nobody has proved impacts to my satisfaction" (conveniently misleading as to whose responsibility it is to prove what to whom, here), and so on - ad nausium.

You demand examples. I give them. You ignore the examples and claim "ad hominen" attacks. You are not interested in a debate or conversation, CK. You wish to validate the PR drivel that you copy off the BCSFA website and then try to disseminate.

If you don't wish to have that debate - why do you post on this forum?

That's the immature part of this.

The other part is that corporations spend millions every year to disseminate their vision of how they want to rob you of you and your children's inheritance through economic colonialism. You are a tool of that theft. As am I - if I buy farmed salmon.

The difference in the pen structure is that on the East Coast they have winter with ice. The pen structure is more robust, CK - not worse. The difference is that on the East Coast they have about a thousand times less salmon and bigger smolts than on the Pacific, CK. There is more risk and interactions than the East Coast.

Both Coasts are dealing with collusion and corruption - the real examples I give are seen by you through your corporate filters as "attacks on the character of salmon farmers". , rather than debating the rather serious points I have raised and examples I have given.

It is safer to live in the box that others have created for you. Less thinking, less responsibility that way. That's how things get so FU in the 1st place - nobody says "hold on a minute there". That's how Hitler came to power, as 1 example. Harper seems to be fine with following those footsteps. I'm not. Many others are also NOT ok with the ways things have been running. AND it's getting worse - not better.

SO - if you don't want to be corrected on your corporate drivel - just lurk - don't post. If you post and are held to task over your postings on this public forum - don't whine about being called on your BS.

 

[ClayoquotKid]

and I wish I could also state that your responses a CK. They don't. They are the same tired old "nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong..." responses that I have come to expect from the so-called best liers for the industry - the shrills.

Of course there are good people in the industry, DFO, the NGOs, AND the public. Everyone of them is to a person - human. Falliable, tribal, emotional - everyone.

In order to communicate effectively - we need trust. In order to develop that trust - we need honesty.

Corporations are driven by greed, not social licence. They are commonly headed by high-functioning sociopaths. Honesty works against them. They hire media shrills to disseminate lies, half-truths and a running narrative: "nothing to see here - move along", "nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong...", "nobody has proved impacts to my satisfaction" (conveniently misleading as to whose responsibility it is to prove what to whom, here), and so on - ad nausium.

You demand examples. I give them. You ignore the examples and claim "ad hominen" attacks. You are not interested in a debate or conversation, CK. You wish to validate the PR drivel you disseminate. If you don't wish to have that debate - why do you post on this forum?

That's the immature part of this.

The other part is that corporations spend millions every year to disseminate their vision of how they want to rob you of you and your children's inheritance through economic colonialism. You are a tool of that theft. As am I - if I buy farmed salmon.

The difference in the pen structure is that on the East Coast they have winter with ice. The pen structure is more robust, CK - not worse. The difference is that on the East Coast they have about a thousand times less salmon and bigger smolts than on the Pacific, CK. There is more risk and interactions than the East Coast.

Both Coasts are dealing with collusion and corruption - the real examples I give are seen by you through your corporate filters as "attacks on the character of salmon farmers". , rather than debating the rather serious points I have raised and examples I have given.

It is safer to live in the box that others have created for you. Less thinking, less responsibility that way. That's how things get so FU in the 1st place - nobody says "hold on a minute there". That's how Hitler came to power, as 1 example. Harper seems to be fine with following those footsteps. I'm not. Many others are also NOT ok with the ways things have been running. AND it's getting worse - not better.

SO - if you don't want to be corrected on your corporate drivel - just lurk - don't post. If you post and are held to task over your postings on this public forum - don't whine about being called on your BS.

You seem to be taking a very high-level view on it here - so high that I think you might have lost sight of the ground.

Your examples all lack substance when it comes to showing an impact of farms on wild salmon stocks.

All of your views on corporations and interpretations of regulatory process have no bearing on the fact that you have focused in on an industry which has existed for decades without ever having shown a measurable impact on the wild salmon it shares space with.

If we were actually talking about wild salmon you might seek to follow up the hypotheses and experiments you have provided with some evidence of them holding true in the real world.

You constantly assert your fears and mistrust yet seem incapable of transferring that same logic to those who kill wild salmon for money and sport.

I'm not trying to deflect anything away from farms when I say that, I am simply putting it out there for the ones on here who aren't prone to such extreme views.

Seems to me that in two posts about salmon farming there have been close to 20,000 views - about 10 of the posters are anti and maybe 3 or 4 come on as pro, or at least neutral.

You can call it a, "Corporate Filter" when I take issue with having myself and others called liars and accused of wrongdoing - I call it standing up to ignorance and narrow-minded villification.

If the spotlight was put on sportfishers and the whole group (of which I am one) was painted with the same brush as the guides, companies and individuals who fished illegally in any number of ways and were prosecuted and charged - I am sure you would take issue too.

As for maturity - Your rants seem strikingly similar to those spewing from tent cities in between bouts of window smashing.

I really have no idea whether you are sitting in your parent's basement, furiously typing away in a Starbucks somewhere, or wearing a tweed jacket while pontificating from a glass tower in downtown Vancouver - but your take on things is certainly interesting.

I'm proud of my job and I love to fish - I will continue to do both despite objections from people like you and in the knowledge that the balance of evidence from the natural world assures us that they are not mutally exclusive.

 

[Gunsmith]

I think this thread has reached the end of value added input, time to close it.

 

[Englishman]

You seem to be taking a very high-level view on it here - so high that I think you might have lost sight of the ground.

On the contrary CK, you take such a low view on it that you are down in the mud and never raise you height out of the muck of your economic justification to see a bigger and wider and clearer picture.

Your examples all lack substance when it comes to showing an impact of farms on wild salmon stocks.
All of your views on corporations and interpretations of regulatory process have no bearing on the fact that you have focused in on an industry which has existed for decades without ever having shown a measurable impact on the wild salmon it shares space with.

Here are just SOME of the multiple measured impacts on salmon runs in the scientific journals. For you to continue to ignore this body of scientific study data and pretend it does not exist is a blatant example of the spin doctrine your industry continues to put out.

Impacts on wild fish populations:-

• General

http://www.plosbiology.org/article/info:doi/10.1371/journal.pbio.0060033
http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/63/7/1162.short
http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/f91-055#.UaTaVJwalzM
http://www.iatp.org/files/Marine_Aquaculture_in_the_United_States_Enviro.htm

• Thru’ Sea lice infestation

http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/276/1672/3385.short
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080212085841.htm
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/272/1564/689.short
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10641260500433531#.UZ-mUMoambs
http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/f04-016
http://www.pnas.org/content/103/42/15506.short
http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&...mN9VDE#v=onepage&q=fish farm sea lice&f=false
http://vhost1.ucs.sfu.ca:9870/science/resources/1320967624.pdf
http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/59/1/131.short
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2109.2001.00627.x/abstract
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004484860500030X
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/M04-149.1#.UaQgapwalzM
http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/f10-105#.UaQmD5walzM
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/318/5857/1772.short
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/M07-042.1#.UaTWlpwalzM

• Thru’ Disease Transmission and Interaction

http://www.pnas.org/content/103/42/15506.short
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/004484869190392K
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/1548-8667(1998)010<0107:ROTHPA>2.0.CO;2#.UaTaA5walzM
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/004484869190370M
http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/4/15/699.short
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020751907000100
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0044848686901675

• Thru’ Harvesting wild fish for Feed

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v405/n6790/abs/4051017a0.html
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1095-8649.1994.tb01285.x/abstract

If we were actually talking about wild salmon you might seek to follow up the hypotheses and experiments you have provided with some evidence of them holding true in the real world.

That the feed lots were allowed to be put into the ocean environment with zero knowledge of what would happen and then the onus is forced upon those who are concerned about wild salmon to have to react is ethically wrong and immoral. You have zero understanding and nothing but contempt for the precautionary principle that the wise, cautious and respectful management of the ecosystem demands.

You constantly assert your fears and mistrust yet seem incapable of transferring that same logic to those who kill wild salmon for money and sport.
I'm not trying to deflect anything away from farms when I say that, I am simply putting it out there for the ones on here who aren't prone to such extreme views.

What on earth angling with rod and line has to do with the spread of parasite and diseases to millions of young smolts and adults on an industrial scale is utterly beyond anyone with any understanding of the issues. This is the classic deflection and denial approach of your industry and so transparently nonsensical no one is fooled.

Seems to me that in two posts about salmon farming there have been close to 20,000 views - about 10 of the posters are anti and maybe 3 or 4 come on as pro, or at least neutral.

What has that to do with anything?
Here are just SOME of the groups and information sites out there which document the huge problems with open net pen salmon feed lots. These represent thousands of concerned scientists and ordinary people, from all over the world. But to someone like you who can filter out all inconvenient evidence these thousands of folks are all wrong and you are right. What blind and wilful ignorance!

http://www.georgiastrait.org/?q=node/184
http://www.farmedanddangerous.org/salmon-farming-problems/
http://www.watershed-watch.org/issues/salmon-farming/salmon-farming-impacts/
http://www.gaaia.org/
http://www.salmonfarmsireland.com/
http://www.davidsuzuki.org/publicat...rmed-salmon/?gclid=CJWPiLukubcCFcqDQgodGzYA_g
http://wcwcvictoria.org/154/salmon-farming-background/
http://www.superheroes4salmon.org/blog/scottish-salmons-lethal-seal-disapproval
http://www.puresalmon.org/problem.html
http://wildfishconservancy.org/resources/infectious-salmon-anemia-virus-isav
http://www.inshore-ireland.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=688&Itemid=170
http://www.salmonfarmmonitor.org/problems.shtml
http://www.saveoursalmon.ca/issues/
http://salmonaresacred.org/breaking-news
http://focs.ca/campaigns/wildsalmon/
http://www.raincoastresearch.org/pdf/Salmon_farming.pdf
http://www.wildsalmoncircle.com/salmon-farming/
http://www.atlanticsalmontrust.org/...d-economic-success-or-ecological-failure.html
http://salmoncoast.org/publications

You can call it a, "Corporate Filter" when I take issue with having myself and others called liars and accused of wrongdoing - I call it standing up to ignorance and narrow-minded villification.

We opponents of salmon feed lots on here and all those dozens of organisations listed above call it standing up to corporate greed, wilful ignorance, cynical destruction of working ecosystems, and twisting of the truth about the multiple impacts of your industry’s activities.

If the spotlight was put on sportfishers and the whole group (of which I am one) was painted with the same brush as the guides, companies and individuals who fished illegally in any number of ways and were prosecuted and charged - I am sure you would take issue too.

As for maturity - Your rants seem strikingly similar to those spewing from tent cities in between bouts of window smashing.

What rubbish! Trying to portray Agent’s and all the other informed scientific and lay opinion on this forum and in hundreds of the scientific journal articles and web sites as some kind of thuggish street protest is absolutely ludicrous. And cynical, libellous and disrespectful, but typical of the personal attacks levelled by your industry.

I realy have no idea whether you are sitting in your parent's basement, furiously typing away in a Starbucks somewhere, or wearing a tweed jacket while pontificating from a glass tower in downtown Vancouver - but your take on things is certainly interesting.

What has the location, age, or fashion consciousness of Agent have to do with anything. The merits of the evidence and logic of the massive anti salmon feed lot arguments are not dissipated in any way by your juvenile insinuations.

I'm proud of my job and I love to fish - I will continue to do both despite objections from people like you and in the knowledge that the balance of evidence from the natural world assures us that they are not mutally exclusive.

Yes proud and arrogant and full of hubris. Convinced that you understand the entire wild salmon ecosystem completely and can “fix” any and all biological problems that have already been indentified and that can possibly arise.
We thousands of industry opponents both on here and those who support, contribute to and run all those groups listed above are secure in the knowledge that the balance of scientific evidence from the literature and the manifestly obvious impacts in the natural world assures us that salmon feed lots and wild salmon are indeed totally and completely mutually exclusive.

 

[reelfast]

cut off all government subsidy of this industry and see how fast it collapses.

 

[ClayoquotKid]

I'll just leave you with this: "you might seek to follow up the hypotheses and experiments you have provided with some evidence of them holding true in the real world."

 

[jeffywestcoast]

After reading everything posted on this forum for and against farmed fish... i think i am not alone in sharing this opinion..

 

[ClayoquotKid]

You are free to practice your religion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sacred
Tight lines!

 

[jeffywestcoast]

Today marks a small victory in a very large war...Hows the mood at the fishfarm this afternoon Clayoquotkid?

 

[Dave]

Today marks a small victory in a very large war...Hows the mood at the fishfarm this afternoon Clayoquotkid?

What victory?

 

[agentaqua]

It's quite illustrating CK - that you would rather dream about what I wear while I post - rather than actually have a debate on the science - or lack thereof.

It's interesting that on one post you are attempting to discredit my knowledge by claiming that I only have "limited knowledge" about fish farms - while on another you admit that I "have quite thoroughly investigated" issues. I guess it depends upon whether you like what I have to say - rather than wishing to debate the science because you understand that you cannot defend your industry's actions. I'll let you in on a secret - I "thoroughly investigate" all the issues.

You are (so far) the most immature and myoptic so-called "professional" from the open net-cage industry I have ever attempted to communicate with. However, I appreciate you are ilustrating the lack of willingness to honestly communicate with others, and the myoptic propaganda spewing ad nausium from your industry - to others on the internet. It really illustrates why the functioning of this industry is so acrimonious and disrespectful.