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

Status
Not open for further replies.
PSF collaboration with Genome BC and Dr. Kristi Miller-Saunders:

http://www.sportfishingbc.com/post.php?Is-disease-affecting-salmon-abundance-224

If you followed the news stories about salmon last year, you may remember the concern around salmon disease. Although disease is suspected to be a significant factor in the high mortality rate of salmon, scientists don't know enough about what specific pathogens or diseases may be involved.

Through the Salish Sea Marine Survival Project, the Pacific Salmon Foundation is partnering with Genome BC and Fisheries and Oceans Canada on the Strategic Salmon Health Initiative. The initiative will investigate the possible presence of 47 known microbes of salmon in all species of wild salmon, hatchery-reared salmon, and aquaculture-raised (sea pens) Atlantic salmon. Just as the human body is full of bacteria, not all microbes in fish are necessarily harmful.

con't...
 
Can't wait for the results. Let's hope the government enacts changes. Disturbing how the Cohen Commission recommendations were largely ignored.
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...e-fish-killed-by-superchilled-water-1.2980172
Nova Scotia aquaculture fish killed by superchilled water
Cooke Aquaculture sites in Annapolis Basin, Shelburne Harbour, Jordan Bay reporting mortalities
CBC News Posted: Mar 03, 2015 3:15 PM AT Last Updated: Mar 03, 2015 3:36 PM AT

Cooke Aquaculture's fish farm in Shelburne Harbour on Nova Scotia's South Shore is one of the sites where officials believe fish have died due to a so-called superchill. (The Canadian Press)

Fish at three aquaculture sites in Nova Scotia have died and a so-called superchill is suspected, the provincial Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture said Tuesday.

Cooke Aquaculture's sites in the Annapolis Basin, Shelburne Harbour and Jordan Bay are reporting mortalities, officials said.

A fish health veterinarian visited the Annapolis Basin and Shelburne Harbour sites and is expected to visit the Jordan Bay site in the next few days to investigate the cause of death, Fisheries and Aquaculture Minister Keith Colwell said in a statement.

"Our provincial fish health veterinarians investigate mortality events to rule out diseases of concern," he said.

The department said a preliminary investigation has found a superchill happened, meaning sustained cold temperatures dropped the temperature of the water to the level that fish blood freezes — around –0.7 C.

Tides in late February and early March also tend to be high, the department said, contributing to to lowering temperatures in sea cages by flooding more shallow areas than usual. Low air temperatures cool the water and receding tides flush the cages with superchilled water.

The Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture said superchills happen every five to seven years and the deaths do not pose a risk to the environment.
 
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/nova-...a-aquaculture-sites-raise-questions-1.2983093

Superchill fish kill at Nova Scotia aquaculture sites raise questions
Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture says fish at 3 aquaculture sites died in so-called superchill
CBC News Posted: Mar 05, 2015 3:16 PM AT Last Updated: Mar 05, 2015 3:52 PM AT

Some Nova Scotia residents and environmental advocates are raising questions after decaying fish carcasses began washing up on a beach near an aquaculture facility this week.

In a YouTube video shot by Ron Neufield Tuesday in in West Green Harbour, N.S., aquaculture pens can be seen in the background.
<iframe width="854" height="510" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/ATU_UCrWroc" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>
"I've lived in West Green Harbour for 55 years and in that 55 years I've never seen a salmon along these shores in any state. Within the past week, I've picked up two salmon carcasses. I guess the question of the day is where did these salmon come from?" fisherman Ricky Hallett says in the video, holding up the dead fish.

Earlier this week, the Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture announced that fish at three aquaculture sites in the province have died and a so-called superchill is the expected cause.

fish kill
Earlier this week, the Nova Scotia Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture announced that fish at three aquaculture sites in the province have died and a so-called superchill is the expected cause. (Submitted by Ron Neufeld)

Cooke Aquaculture's sites in the Annapolis Basin, Shelburne Harbour and Jordan Bay are reporting mortalities, officials said.

The Department of Fisheries and Aquaculture said superchills happen every five to seven years and the deaths do not pose a risk to the environment.

'Industry has some fundamental flaws'

However, Ray Plourde with the Ecology Action Centre disputes that a rare anomaly is to blame.

"To suggest that this is some kind of anomaly that happens once every seven years or whatever like an El Niño event is completely false. It happened last year, it happened the year before where fish completely froze in these pens," he said.

"This industry has some fundamental flaws in the model and it makes it fundamentally risky for the operators, but also for the public, which have provided an awful lot of public money into this industry."

Plourde calls the idea of ocean aquaculture pens "fundamentally flawed."

"[The aquaculture model] hasn't evolved an iota since it originally was thought up — which is stick a bunch of fish in a big open net bag in a coastal area, feed them, raise them up, slaughter them and send them to market," he said.

He said the problem is the inability to control interactions with the natural environment.

"Those include parasites, sea lice, disease and weather. In the extremes, in the warmest period of the summer the fish can be starved of oxygen because the water has become too low and the oxygen-carrying capacity has been reduced," said Plourde.

"Similarly in the winter, when it gets too cold, the oxygen level goes down and in the case of extreme cold weather it literally freezes them alive, which has got to be a grisly way to die."

He said the solution is to move fish farms to a closed containment system on land which allows producers to control all the variables.

Nell Halse, speaking for Cooke Aquaculture, admits that "weather is an ongoing challenge."

"Cold water is the definite cause. We just don't know the extent of loss yet," she said.

"Salmon grow best when water temperatures are stable within 0 and 12 C. Fish survive temperatures below zero but a phenomenon known as superchill may occur and result in fish mortalities."

Halse said this winter's cold temperatures "have resulted in higher than normal mortalities on some of our Nova Scotia farms."

She confirmed that the loss is covered by the company's insurance.
 
http://rabble.ca/columnists/2015/05...al&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

Nova Scotia government back on the hook over salmon farming
By Ralph Surette | May 19, 2015


Photo: Scottish Salmon Producers' Organisation/flickr

Here's a downer. The McNeil government appears to be slipping into the rut the NDP government was in. That rut got it turfed out of office: sudden herky-jerky decisions out of central command, no one consulted, the public rattled and things blowing up. You've heard the to-do over film credits, university governance and sudden cuts to community groups. And now this one is back: our old friend the open-pen salmon issue.

After painstaking study, the Doelle-Lahey panel acknowledged that the critics -- which include the fishing and tourism industries as well as environmentalists and a broad swath of community groups -- have plenty of reasons to be concerned about these operations.

Although it disappointed some critics in not calling for an outright ban on open-pen feedlots -- instead, giving the industry the chance to redeem itself with better practices in future -- it outlined a regulatory process to gain public trust and move the industry forward, which would include a stakeholder advisory committee on regulations and a scientific one to keep the government abreast of the science.

As the various interested parties eagerly awaited the next move and its promised consultation and transparency, what they got instead was a sudden announcement in April by Fisheries Minister Keith Colwell, camouflaged under news coverage of the federal budget, of new legislation -- Bill 95 -- that would be fast-tracked and would contain only a fraction of the Doelle-Lahey recommendations.

Notably, veterinary records would be off-limits to freedom of information requests -- a rank move to prevent the public and fishermen from being upset by the chemicals and medications used in feed, against lice and as defouling agents in these operations.

Meanwhile, the Harper government is being helpful by trashing the Fisheries Act. Two years ago, Glenn Cooke, CEO of the dominant player, Cooke Aquaculture, and other company officials pleaded guilty in a New Brunswick court to using an illegal pesticide that killed untold amounts of lobster larvae and were fined $500,000. It's a sleazy business, but not to worry in future. Under the Harper changes, chemicals toxic to lobster will be legal.

The minister also announced that leaseholders of some 160 dormant sites would be asked to activate them as early as this summer. Forget about consultation.

And an "administrator" would be named to oversee the whole thing -- which sounds to some like industry running itself, like pulp company clearcutters running forest policy. What about the stakeholder and scientific advisory committees? Cornered on CBC Radio, Colwell mumbled unconvincingly that they were coming. And no determination of zones where open pens might be acceptable or not, as Doelle-Lahey recommended.

Not to worry, says the minister. The bill is one thing, but the specific regulations are yet to come. The stakeholder community is hoping that there is indeed something to be salvaged as the regulations roll out, but suspicions are high that the fix is in.

Last December, Premier Stephen McNeil angrily and rightly called on Cooke to return a chunk of the $25 million gifted to it by the former NDP government, since none of the promised jobs had materialized. Why, then, this apparent turnaround? Is it indeed our politics off the rails again? Is Cooke still wining and dining our politicians -- which is how this whole thing got started in the first place? Or has it something to do with the obtuse belief, deep in the Halifax establishment in particular, that opposition to open pens is all "not in my backyard" nonsense, sheer progress-busting negativity, a failure to "be bold?"

Indeed, even if you consider objections to shoreline fouling, pesticides in the ocean, threats to wild salmon and other marine life, sludge in the sea currents, dead zones under cages and diseased fish on the market as so much whining, consider the economics. For our $25 million we were supposed to get a processing plant in Shelburne, a hatchery in Digby and an expanded fish-feed mill in Truro. A processing plant -- while established South Shore fish processors can't get enough workers and are shipping product elsewhere! Indeed, if there was a running plant, it would be closed now because all the South Shore fish were killed off by "superchill" last winter and infectious salmon anemia is cyclically rampant (in New Brunswick, production is down 40 per cent because of sea lice). Besides, salmon farming is notoriously easy to mechanize. Jobs are declining, not increasing, wherever processing takes place. In other words, the promise of jobs is a lie for gullible politicians.

As for the other facilities that Cooke would have expanded at public expense, its already-excessive influence over aquaculture in Nova Scotia generally means that other operators, even in an unconnected field like shellfish, don't dare criticize Cooke publicly.

So with this hot issue, as with others, is the McNeil government flubbing it?

In repeating the mistakes of the NDP, what this government is not getting, says Raymond Plourde, in charge of the salmon file at the Ecology Action Centre, is that "the public wants in."

How many governments must bite the dust before that can happen?

Ralph Surette is a veteran freelance journalist living in Yarmouth County. This article was first published in the Chronicle Herald.
 
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/aq...-are-about-to-run-out-of-fish-food-2015-07-14

Press Release
Aquaculture's Explosive Growth Means Farmers Are About to Run Out of Fish Food
By
Published: July 14, 2015 7:30 a.m. ET
Demand for Fish Meal Will Outstrip Supply in the Next Two to Five Years, Sending the Industry Scrambling for Alternatives, Says Lux Research

BOSTON, MA, Jul 14, 2015 (Marketwired via COMTEX) -- The booming $170 billion aquaculture industry could face a shortfall of fish meal and fish oil for feed as early as 2016, and demand could outpace fish meal supply by up to 16 MMT (Million Metric Tons) in 2025. The mismatch will hasten the opportunities for alternative sources of feed such as plant proteins, algae and even insects, according to Lux Research.

Fish meal and fish oil are the lifeblood of the aquaculture feed industry, and demand is growing at 8% annually. The demand for fish meal will nearly double by 2025, creating a need for over one million tons of alternative high-protein meal.

"The future of fish feed is a blend of alternatives -- no single source will dominate as fish meal has," said Sara Olson, Lux Research Analyst and lead author of the report titled, "Tightening Fish Meal Supply Creates Opportunities for Aquaculture Feed Alternatives."




"However, most alternatives to fish meal have unmet needs of cost, nutrition and scale. To take advantage of the coming shifts, companies should find opportunities to address these challenges for these alternative sources," she added.

Lux Research analysts evaluated the aquaculture industry's search for feed, and the decline of fish meal and fish oil production. Among their findings:
-- Fish meal prices have quadrupled since 2000. Fish meal and the
alternative soy meal are both becoming more expensive sources of
protein. Fish meal prices have quadrupled since 2000 and still rise at
a 10% annual rate, while soy meal prices have doubled since 2007.


-- Three species dominate aquaculture feed demand. Shrimp, tilapia and
salmon account for 40% of the global fish feed consumption, with the
remainder coming from trout, catfish, carp, and other fish and
crustaceans.


-- The majority of fish meal alternatives are in their infancies today.
Alternatives like insect protein, recycled waste, and algae face
challenges like low production capacity, high cost, and consumer
aversion that make them unrealistic protein sources for aquaculture
feed today.

The report, titled "Tightening Fish Meal Supply Creates Opportunities for Aquaculture Feed Alternatives," is part of the Lux Research Agro Innovation Intelligence service.

About Lux Research

Lux Research provides strategic advice and ongoing intelligence for emerging technologies. Leaders in business, finance and government rely on us to help them make informed strategic decisions. Through our unique research approach focused on primary research and our extensive global network, we deliver insight, connections and competitive advantage to our clients. Visit www.luxresearchinc.com for more information.

Image Available: http://www2.marketwire.com/mw/frame_mw?attachid=2855350
Contact:
Carole Jacques
Lux Research, Inc.
617-502-5314
carole.jacques@luxresearchinc.com

SOURCE: Lux Research

(C) 2015 Marketwire L.P. All rights reserved.
The MarketWatch News Department was not involved in the creation of the content.
 

Attachments

  • PR%20Graphic_AG_7_13_15.jpg
    PR%20Graphic_AG_7_13_15.jpg
    32.7 KB · Views: 73
Last edited by a moderator:
Brilliant young scientist finds new way to communicate the problem with sea lice from salmon farms
<iframe src="https://player.vimeo.com/video/134131536" width="500" height="281" frameborder="0" webkitallowfullscreen mozallowfullscreen allowfullscreen></iframe>
 
As updates come, the Pacific Salmon Foundation will continue to post to the link below. In the meantime, PSF and, specifically, the Strategic Salmon Health Initiative (SSHI) just reached a new milestone. See story / link below for more information.

For regular updates on SSHI and PSF check here: http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/showthread.php?30017-Here-s-what-s-new-at-PSF/page4
You can also follow us on Facebook: Pacific Salmon Foundation or Twitter: @PSF for real time updates.
---
The Strategic Salmon Health Initiative is a four-phased partnership between Genome BC and Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) to clarify the presence or absence of disease-causing microbes that could be limiting Pacific salmon productivity. The results of the Phase 2a platform evaluation of the initiative have now been reviewed by the National Canadian Science Advisory Secretariat (CSAS), which coordinates the peer review of scientific issues for DFO. Their review was very positive and approved the use of the technology platform for Phase 2b of the project. A one-pager of the results can be downloaded here.

More comprehensive details of the review can be found at: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/csas-sccs/publications/sar-as/2015/2015_039-eng.html

In 2013, the Pacific Salmon Foundation embarked on this remarkable partnership with Genome BC and Fisheries and Oceans Canada. The Strategic Salmon Health Initiative was started 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.


- See more at: https://www.psf.ca/blog/strategic-salmon-health-initiative-achieves-milestone#sthash.Wp7D2OLB.dpuf
 
http://asf.ca/effects-of-sea-lice-on-sea-trout.html

Aquaculture Environment Interactions

Effects of salmon lice Lepeophtheirus salmonis on wild sea trout Salmo trutta—a literature review

This review focuses on impacts of sea lice on sea trout, but also has mention that sea lice can lead to an average of 12 - 29% fewer salmon spawners.The article can be downloaded on this page, and from the website below.http://www.int-res.com/abstracts/aei/v7/n2/p91-113/

ABSTRACT: Salmon farming increases the abundance of salmon lice, which are ectoparasites of salmonids in the sea. Here we review the current knowledge on the effects of salmon lice on wild sea trout. Salmon lice feed on host mucus, skin and muscle, and infestation may induce osmoregulatory dysfunction, physiological stress, anaemia, reduced feeding and growth, increased susceptibility to secondary infections, reduced disease resistance and ultimately mortality of individual sea trout. Wild sea trout in farm-free areas generally show low lice levels. In farm-intensive areas, lice levels on wild sea trout are typically higher, and more variable than in farm-free areas. Lice on wild sea trout are found at elevated levels particularly within 30 km of the nearest farms but can also extend to further ranges. Salmon lice in intensively farmed areas have negatively impacted wild sea trout populations by reducing growth and increasing marine mortality. Quantification of these impacts remains a challenge, although population-level effects have been quantified in Atlantic salmon by comparing the survival of chemically protected fish with control groups, which are relevant also for sea trout. Mortality attributable to salmon lice can lead to an average of 12-29% fewer salmon spawners. Reduced growth and increased mortality will reduce the benefits of marine migration for sea trout, and may also result in selection against anadromy in areas with high lice levels. Salmon lice-induced effects on sea trout populations may also extend to altered genetic composition and reduced diversity - See more at: http://asf.ca/effects-of-sea-lice-on-sea-trout.html#sthash.WOgjsXwX.dpuf

Effects of Sea Lice - Download Article http://0101.nccdn.net/1_5/1f5/0b8/16e/sea-lice-effects.pdf
 
http://envirolaw.com/precautionary-principle-stronger-part-of-canadian-law/

Precautionary principle stronger part of Canadian law

Written by Dianne Saxe, August 31, 2015, Environmental laws, Environmental litigation and enforcement, Species at risk

In Morton v Canada (Fisheries and Oceans), 2015 FC 575, the Federal court put unusually strong reliance on the precautionary principle to strike down parts of an aquaculture licence granted by the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans (the “Minister”) to Marine Harvest, a multinational seafood company.
Marine Harvest operated a fish farm in Shelter Bay, BC, not far from the wild Pacific salmon migration route along the Fraser River. In March, 2013, the company transferred infected Atlantic salmon from one of its hatcheries to Shelter Bay. The Fisheries Act aquaculture licence allowed them to do it, because both the hatchery and the fish farm were within the same “Salmonid Transfer Zone”.

Alexandra Morton, a noted biologist, launched a court challenge against the Minister and Marine Harvest in Federal Court. Ms. Morton successfully argued that allowing this movement of infected smolts conflicted with the overriding requirements of the Fishery (General) Regulations, SOR/93-53 (FGRs), which prohibit fish transfers that may adversely affect wild fish or harm their protection and conservation.

The 2012 Commission of Inquiry into the Decline of Sockeye Salmon in the Fraser River concluded that there is some risk posed to wild sockeye salmon from diseases on fish farms. It recommended that ensuring the health of wild stocks should be “DFO’s number one priority in conducting fish health work” (Cohen Commission, The Uncertain Future of Fraser River Sockeye, vol 2 at 113 and vol 1 at 474).

The Minister argued that that the court should be highly deferential to his department’s expertise on complex matters of fisheries science. Since he was satisfied that the virus in the infected smolts had not been proven to cause disease in wild Pacific salmon, his decision must be presumed to be reasonable unless Ms. Morton could prove otherwise.
Fortunately, the Court disagreed.

Precautionary Principle

Under the precautionary principle, a lack of full scientific certainty (in this case, how harmful the virus is to wild Pacific salmon) does not excuse lax regulation. Allowing the transfer of infected fish into open pens near the wild fish run did not err on the side of caution, and did not reflect the precautionary principle.


[45] The evidence before the Court demonstrates that there is a body of credible scientific study, conducted by respected scientists in different countries, establishing a causal relationship between PRV [the virus] and HSMI [the disease]. The evidence also indicates that there are scientists who question the link – but concede that no other disease agent has been identified as the culprit for HSMI. … Thus, although there is a healthy debate between respected scientists on the issue, the evidence suggests that the disease agent (PRV) may be harmful to the protection and conservation of fish, and therefore a “lack of full scientific certainty should not be used a reason for postponing measures to prevent environmental degradation”.

The Federal Court accepted the precautionary principle as a norm of substantive Canadian law, to be used in the interpretation of all statutes and regulations. The Marine Harvest license conditions were invalid, and conflicted with section 56 of the FGRs, both as a matter of general statutory interpretation and because the FGRs must be interpreted through the lens of the precautionary principle:


[43] The precautionary principle recognizes, that as a matter of sound public policy the lack of complete scientific certainty should not be used as a basis for avoiding or postponing measures to protect the environment, as there are inherent limits in being able to predict environmental harm. Moving from the realm public policy to the law, the precautionary principle is at a minimum, an established aspect of statutory interpretation, and arguably, has crystallized into a norm of customary international law and substantive domestic law…
[98] The consequence of interpreting subsection 56(b) consistently with the precautionary principle is that the licence conditions must also reflect the precautionary principle. As the licence conditions cannot derogate from or be inconsistent with subsection 56(b), they therefore cannot derogate from the precautionary principle.

This may be the strongest, most nuanced judicial statement on the precautionary principle in Canada since the Supreme Court of Canada first recognized it in 114957 Canada Ltée (Spraytech, Société d’arrosage) v Hudson (Town), 2001 SCC 40.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
http://asf.ca/ns-says-new-aquaculture-regulations-in-october.html

NS Says New Aquaculture Regulations in October CHRONICLE-HERALDNova Scotia Aquaculture Regulations Coming in OctoberNova Scotia’s fisheries minister says regulations for aquaculture should be ready in October and will be “some of the best, if not the best” in the world.Keith Colwell said in an interview Thursday that he sees major economic potential for the province from aquaculture, but it must be done right.“We have to have a balance to grow the economy and make sure we look after our environment,” he said. “We have to make sure we do those two things and they have to go hand in hand.”Colwell had previously suggested the regulations would be ready this summer, but on Thursday he said consultation is taking longer than expected.“I’d rather it take longer to do it and do it right than rush it and not have it right.”The final product will be a combination of things the government wanted to do and “pretty well all the things that were in” a recent auditor general’s report and the Doelle-Lahey report on aquaculture, said Colwell.“We’ve touched all of those and we’ve gone beyond that,” he said, adding that they’ve evaluated what is done in Maine, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and parts of Europe.There has been a moratorium on new leases while the regulations have been under development. Every area in the province is suitable for aquaculture, said Colwell, but some types of aquaculture are not suitable in every area.That will be spelled out in the regulations, he said.“In some areas, we just may decide that we’re not going to do it there for all kinds of reasons.”Cooke Aquaculture has said in the past that the delays in getting the regulations in place have hampered its ability to make good on plans for a processing plant in Shelburne. The company received a $25-million loan from the province, $9 million of which is forgivable, for the plant and other projects in 2012.Everything is supposed to be in place by the end of the year or the company must repay the forgivable loan with interest.To date, the company has accessed $18 million from the pot. Company spokeswoman Nell Halse said in an email Thursday that Cooke has only accessed the loan “when conditions were met for investment in (Nova Scotia) as per the agreement.”“We will honour the repayment terms of the loan with the province — just as we honour all of our financial and legal commitments.”Cooke has supported the regulatory review and “urged the minister to release the new (regulations) and to start the process of developing the sector so that (Nova Scotia) can realize the benefits of a growing and responsible aquaculture sector,” she said.Although he said the Business Department would deal with loan conditions, Colwell said the government would not change the parameters of the deal with Cooke.He disputed claims by the company that it needed more leases in order to have the capacity to build the processing plant.He also said the government wasn’t going to speed up the regulations process.“In the past, we weren’t prepared for aquaculture, we weren’t doing it properly. That’s an understatement, it’s that bad and we know that.”Once the regulations are released, the government will choose the people to sit on the independent board that will review licence and lease applications, he said.http://thechronicleherald.ca/novasc...re-rules-due-in-october-worth-waiting-for-n.s. - See more at: http://asf.ca/ns-says-new-aquaculture-regulations-in-october.html#sthash.9VFQb6Lh.dpuf
 
the real difference between east coast and west coast is....commercial fishermen and women in maritimes can elect governments.
 
Two Sides to the Debate on Salmon Farming in NL

THE OVERCAST

There Are Two Sides to the Debate on Salmon Farming in Newfoundland

BY OVERCAST GUEST AUTHOR
JUNE 1, 2016
Article by Owen Meyers

On one side are independent scientists, salmon anglers, and conservation groups like the Atlantic Salmon Federation who point to the detrimental effects on wild salmon populations because of disease, escaped genetically modified fish, and the creating of parasitic populations of sea lice that can wipe out millions of fish.

On the other side are the industry boosters like Mark Lane, executive director of the Newfoundland Aquaculture Industry Association, who in his May 2nd 2016 letter to The Telegram, rolled out all the old platitudes about how aquaculture is the wave of the future. His submission is laden with words like “conservation” and “science” and phrases like “catalyst for rural revitalization from coast to coast” and “sustainable production practices.” It goes on and on.

The truth of growing salmon is available in documents out of the Court of Queen’s Bench of New Brunswick, where Gray Aqua Group of Companies (one of the biggest salmon farming companies in the Province) went into receivership on April 25th 2016. The affidavit of James W. Hall, vice president of the main creditor Callidus Capital Corporation, details all the things that have gone wrong with Gray Aqua’s operation on the South Coast.

Gray Aqua are $55 million in debt and this is their second receivership in two years. At paragraph 10 of his affidavit Hall describes how millions of salmon had to be destroyed in 2013 because they were infected with Infectious Salmon Anemia. That triggered the first receivership. Gray Aqua received $33 million in compensation from the Federal Government.

Then there was a massive sea lice infestation that killed off another $11.5 – $14.5M worth of salmon, and which crashed the company again.

Finally there was the loss of 380,000 smolt which had to be destroyed due to an outbreak of bacterial kidney disease.

As for the employees, Hall states in his affidavit that Grays Aqua has approximately 64 employees, none of which are unionized or have a pension plan. Gray Aqua are not the first salmon growing operation to go bankrupt. It is a high risk business and has a record of being a vector for disease to wild fish stocks.

Far from being an ecologically sustainable industry providing well-paying jobs for rural residents, aquaculture is a government-subsidized trainwreck resplendent with a comfortable and well paid cheerleading government aquaculture bureaucracy.The politicians from the rural ridings are desperate to be able to point at anything positive in their impoverished rural ridings.

In reality the taxpayers of the province are paying out millions in grants and subsidies to an industry that has the potential to destroy wild salmon stocks before it goes down in flames like the infamous Sprung Greenhouse cucumber failure of the late 1980’s that cost us taxpayers $17.5 million and was sold to investors for $1.

To see the dark side of salmon farming Google “Chile salmon disease.”

http://theovercast.ca/there-are-two-sides-to-the-debate-on-salmon-farming-in-newfoundland/

- See more at: http://asf.ca/two-sides-to-the-debate-on-salmon-farming-in-nl.html#sthash.ENWwluE5.dpuf
 
It's incredible how much wrong a person can find with this industry once they start to look into it. and it's destroying what's left of our wild stocks. imo I don't think our government (federal or provincial) or industry really cares. it's a sad time for what's left of our wild stocks in our coastal provinces.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top