P.E.I. fish lab loses international credentials

[Dave]

As far as PSM goes (Post Spawning Mortality for those unfamiliar with the jargon) - do you agree it would be a very good idea to test those fish for ISA, PRV and other diseases in order to put that controversy to rest????

Yes.
I'm retired and obviously out of the inner loop but I believe viral, bacterial, parasitical, contaminant and stress parameter samples are being collected, as they have been since the early 90's. Check out DFO's Environmental Watch program.

Do you agree more fish should be allowed to reach spawning areas? If so, why are you not pushing that button?

 

[agentaqua]

Yes.
I'm retired and obviously out of the inner loop but I believe viral, bacterial, parasitical, contaminant and stress parameter samples are being collected, as they have been since the early 90's. Check out DFO's Environmental Watch program.

Do you agree more fish should be allowed to reach spawning areas? If so, why are you not pushing that button?

What button is that? You have a "secret" button you push to get more fish? Damn, I knew DFO was holding out on us...

 

[agentaqua]

Hey Aqua - Do you talk to people in real life like that?

Ya I certainly do CK - ESPECIALLY to industry hacks, communications departments, PR consulting firms and other sociopaths and bullies who lie and mislead the public. They never seem to get it or acknowledge society's need for accurate and timely info in order to provide oversight to the management of the legacy we are leaving for future generations. Fracking proponents, tobbacco companies, big oil and gas, pipeline proponents all operate on the same script of sowing doubt and misdirection.

Not saying you are any of those people - of course - but I am seriously p*seed-off and fed-up with the lack of transparency and honesty not just within how the fish farm industry co-ops democracy and good governance - but in how this government has been corrupted by Harper and his band of con men.

I've really had enough BS - as have many others. If you had experience with a more open consensus-based management regime that treated people with respect, openness, honesty and fairness - you'd know the difference between that and the discussion we are having now with DFO/CFIA and other federal reps. There are other ways to do this - and this model hasn't worked for many years despite your obvious inexperience and discomfort in alternative management models.

I'm done playing nice and hoping that if I ask politely enough maybe I'll get honest information and co-operation from bullies and people who get paid to find creative ways to lie to you and stall you. Many others who read this forum also feel the exact same way. Maybe you should examine how effective that approach has been for you and your company and industry, mr. "sustainability". Is it really that hard to tell your bosses that this approach isn't working, CK? Are you really that scared of loosing your job?

 

[Dave]

What button is that? You have a "secret" button you push to get more fish? Damn, I knew DFO was holding out on us...

That button is to advocate for fewer chinook or sockeye salmon to be killed either on route, or in the mainstem Fraser River. Simple really.

 

[ClayoquotKid]

I'm done playing nice and hoping that if I ask politely enough maybe I'll get honest information and co-operation from bullies and people who get paid to find creative ways to lie to you and stall you. Many others who read this forum also feel the exact same way. Maybe you should examine how effective that approach has been for you and your company and industry, mr. "sustainability". Is it really that hard to tell your bosses that this approach isn't working, CK? Are you really that scared of loosing your job?

What "approach" would that be Aqua?

Asking for opponents of aquaculture to provide more evidence than weak correlations and ever increasing conspiracy theories to explain their incredibly deep-set position regarding the status of wild stocks in relation to existing farms?

In regard to all the "facts" you have provided in support of your view that salmon farms have negatively impacted wild salmon runs I think a quote from Einstein is appropriate, "If I were wrong, one would be enough."

When the scientific, or evidence based end of your argument runs out you start bashing Harper and his "band of con men", while ranting about how "fish farm industry co-ops democracy and good governance".

It is impossible to prove a negative so there will never be an instance where it can be definitively shown that farms have zero impact on wild stocks - the whole point of my position is that after more than 30 years the opposite (farms have a negative impact) has never been shown either - this would lead me to believe that the impact (if it is present) is very small, as it seems impossible to measure given the rest of the background variations.

My position relies on empirical evidence, science and logic - my job relies on using the resulting facts to form arguments based in reality and devoid of speculation.

You keep on working on the what ifs and I will keep working on the what we know and what we are already doing about its.

 

[GLG]

You seem to be able to explain away the worst in shoddy scientific practice when the result suits your views, and the results thousands of other tests run in Canada and the US are also dismissed as "collusion" falling nicely into your corporate/government tinfoil hat files.

What about the thought that ISA from Norway is not present in BC?

That the lab which reported finding it did so using less than acceptable methods and failed to adequately check their results before running to the media with one of the most active anti-farm campaigners and a SFU statistician (Note - no fish pathologist, virologist ect. present)?

Hey wait a minute... you changing history again.... CFIA test results were inconclusive the pencil pushers only reported to the public that they were negative. Heck they even got a positive hit in one sample. Remember the email about how they were "wining the PR war" The lab results were officially inconclusive that inconvenient fact was brought out at the Cohen Commission.

The way you 3 seem to just forget that evidence and recommendations from many years and panels always comes to the same conclusion.... get the feedlots off the migration routes..... Its simple enough that even a child can grasp the concept.......

I'm one of those people that have lost my patience with you nut bars and I can't think of anyone I know that does not feel the same way..... Every year it's just one more shyt show coming out from you guys.

Here is a question for you three.... Why is it that former employees have zero good things to say about your feedlot farms. You would think that they can't be all that bad but every one that I have meet has a very low opinion of this industry. Why is that?

 

[profisher]

What I see...what is real....DFO is in bed with the Fish Farming Industry. They are supporting it with tax payers money at the expense of fulfilling their #1 mandate. To protect wild fish populations. Wild fish populations have supported CANADIAN commercial fishers and processing industries...CANADIAN owned sport fishing lodges/guides. They have supported an economically vibrant recreational fishery and all the spin off to CANADIAN owned businesses that benefited from it. (hotels, marinas, campgrounds, restaurants, boat/engine dealers, tackle outlets, fish processors, taxidermists etc etc) Now a foreign company/industry has sidetracked much of the limited resources that DFO should be directing towards a recovery effort for our wild fish and to help CANADIANS. I also believe the virus threat is real and unlike a chicken virus outbreak...you can't contain a water born outbreak. (fish swim) This is just to big a risk for CANADIANS.

 

[agentaqua]

CK - there are many models of consensus decision making around the globe. Most of those models are the OPPOSITE type of communication protocols developed by the corporate world's paid PR consulting firms. many of these models have been developed over thousands of years of communial living - often as aboriginal communities. Many western academics and community groups make their careers studying the long-term sustainability of these communities with shared decision-making and protocols over the development on consenses.

fascism, communism and capitalism (most closely aligned with fascism) are but 3 types of governence with often very mixed and failed results. The stock market (which is the mantra of capitalism) has crashed several times now, and was only saved by a $700 BILLION infusion into those "poor" American banks - that same economic model which preaches "free markets", and how great life will be if we buy more, consume more, and help-out those poor stock markets.

It's an institutionalized mindset supported by propaganda and ruled by fear. It will fail again, and soon. Maybe not soon enough. It's a wrong process that is threatened by good data, good information exchange, and an engaged public - what democracy is supossed to be about.

We are all a part of that sytem at present - except maybe for some aboriginal groups living in seclusion in Borneo or South America. We are all affected by the impacts of global warming/climate change and will be for at least the next 1500 years or so.

The same PR boosters that have been responsible for continuing misinformation about the consequences of our dependence on fossil fuels are largely the same bunch that do PR work for big oil, tobacco companies and fish farms - among other industries that need to hide what their impacts are to the public.

We have been through all of this over many past postings on different threads in this forum already. You have contributed to these threads - so you have already read the obvious rebuttals to many of your postings which can be phraphrased most simply as "you can't prove it', and 'i don't believe it" regardless of the logic and data presented to you.

Obviously you read how different the communication was between myself and sockeyefry where we were able to openly debate the pros and cons over the available science. Can you not see how different and typically immature your communication has been in this forum?

As an example just a couple of posts ago you paternistically and disrespectfully called GLG a 4 YO - yet you appeared surprised when I responded in kind to your post. Only then did you recognize how disrespectful that communication was - yet you appear oblivious as to how you precipitated that exchange through your lack of respect for other's post.

That's what I mean about how immature and disrespectful that information exchange is from many FF boosters and pr people - and how ill suited that communication is to a consenses-based decision-making process over the shared responsibility of natural resources.

I guess that has worked well for many industries since they don't really want anyone telling them what to do and what not to do. Well, CK - we are nearly at an end with that over open net-cage operations whether you like it or not. we are not going away or giving-up. The issues are far too serious for that whether you agree or not.

You are but 1 employee who gets paid to "defend' your companies interests - but we as a society will be here long after your industry (as it is today) either morphs into CC and is regulated by another decision-making and enforcement body - or disappears entirely.

I would guess it is that fear that consumes you and makes it impossible for your to understand or hear any other voices. It must be tough to live in so much fear all the time. It takes courage and maturity to try something different and to change. It would be unfair of me to expect that from you as an individual.

However, I am demanding openess, honesty and transparency from those who jobs are to serve the public. I'm done playing the game by the rules set by the PR firms and lobbiests.

 

[agentaqua]

That button is to advocate for fewer chinook or sockeye salmon to be killed either on route, or in the mainstem Fraser River. Simple really.

Been doing that for years already Dave. Every year has a new species or stock of concern. We already had this debate on where impacts from fish farms fit in.

 

[ClayoquotKid]

CK - there are many models of consensus decision making around the globe. Most of those models are the OPPOSITE type of communication protocols developed by the corporate world's paid PR consulting firms. many of these models have been developed over thousands of years of communial living - often as aboriginal communities. Many western academics and community groups make their careers studying the long-term sustainability of these communities with shared decision-making and protocols over the development on consenses.

fascism, communism and capitalism (most closely aligned with fascism) are but 3 types of governence with often very mixed and failed results. The stock market (which is the mantra of capitalism) has crashed several times now, and was only saved by a $700 BILLION infusion into those "poor" American banks - that same economic model which preaches "free markets", and how great life will be if we buy more, consume more, and help-out those poor stock markets.

It's an institutionalized mindset supported by propaganda and ruled by fear. It will fail again, and soon. Maybe not soon enough. It's a wrong process that is threatened by good data, good information exchange, and an engaged public - what democracy is supossed to be about.

We are all a part of that sytem at present - except maybe for some aboriginal groups living in seclusion in Borneo or South America. We are all affected by the impacts of global warming/climate change and will be for at least the next 1500 years or so.

The same PR boosters that have been responsible for continuing misinformation about the consequences of our dependence on fossil fuels are largely the same bunch that do PR work for big oil, tobacco companies and fish farms - among other industries that need to hide what their impacts are to the public.

We have been through all of this over many past postings on different threads in this forum already. You have contributed to these threads - so you have already read the obvious rebuttals to many of your postings which can be phraphrased most simply as "you can't prove it', and 'i don't believe it" regardless of the logic and data presented to you.

Obviously you read how different the communication was between myself and sockeyefry where we were able to openly debate the pros and cons over the available science. Can you not see how different and typically immature your communication has been in this forum?

As an example just a couple of posts ago you paternistically and disrespectfully called GLG a 4 YO - yet you appeared surprised when I responded in kind to your post. Only then did you recognize how disrespectful that communication was - yet you appear oblivious as to how you precipitated that exchange through your lack of respect for other's post.

That's what I mean about how immature and disrespectful that information exchange is from many FF boosters and pr people - and how ill suited that communication is to a consenses-based decision-making process over the shared responsibility of natural resources.

I guess that has worked well for many industries since they don't really want anyone telling them what to do and what not to do. Well, CK - we are nearly at an end with that over open net-cage operations whether you like it or not. we are not going away or giving-up. The issues are far too serious for that whether you agree or not.

You are but 1 employee who gets paid to "defend' your companies interests - but we as a society will be here long after your industry (as it is today) either morphs into CC and is regulated by another decision-making and enforcement body - or disappears entirely.

I would guess it is that fear that consumes you and makes it impossible for your to understand or hear any other voices. It must be tough to live in so much fear all the time. It takes courage and maturity to try something different and to change. It would be unfair of me to expect that from you as an individual.

However, I am demanding openess, honesty and transparency from those who jobs are to serve the public. I'm done playing the game by the rules set by the PR firms and lobbiests.

Who is "We" Aqua?

You seem to think that I live in fear, yet express so much of it in all your hand-wringing, conspiratorial social commentary that I wonder who is really afraid.

Are you scared that you are wrong about your presumptions of doom and gloom about the aquaculture industry, and that every year there will be healthy runs of wild salmon returning in different areas all over the coast - regardless of whether there are farms present or not?

Are you afraid that the natural world will continue to disprove your theories and that salmon farmers in BC will continue to raise fish alongside wild stocks for decades to come - as they have for decades passed?

 

[shuswap]

As far as PSM goes (Post Spawning Mortality for those unfamiliar with the jargon) - do you agree it would be a very good idea to test those fish for ISA, PRV and other diseases in order to put that controversy to rest????

Actually PSM refers to Prespawn Mortality. There is Fish Health testing done at DFO salmon enhancement facilities for endemic pathogens (i.e. IHNv and Ich) as well as the testing Dave has already alluded to. There are a couple of things that need to be considered before going out and testing prespawn fish.

Firstly, the best fish to test for biosampling is a fish that is captured alive and sampled immediately after been euthanized. After that the carcass should be fresh (a matter of a few hours) and kept on ice and sent to a fish health lab within 2 days. It can be frozen, but the freeze and thaw process would negate histological work. To get a fresh prespawn fish that is only a few hours old, free from predation, able to be sampled successfully in the field and transported from sometimes remote locations is not an easy task. Shipping sounds fairly straightforward and easy, but in reality it is not. For instance, some air carriers will not allow shipments with wet ice. Also some couriers have contracted services to others which may or may not guarantee that your shipment will get to it’s destination in a timely manner. In addition, the impact of bears should not be taken lightly because a carcass will usually not last long on the spawning grounds if they are actively working a stream or lakeshore. Most often the bears win. The impact of bears can greatly impact the determination of spawning success. Sockeye that spawn at depth in a lake that may not be available to recovery can impact the determination of spawning success. If you were intent on getting fresh carcasses you would pretty much have to be right there because the next day you could be out of luck – especially in areas like Early Stuart, Quesnel or Chilko where bears are the top dogs. You also have to keep in mind that migrating salmon are in the process of being broken down once they enter freshwater. Available energy is going to gonad development and migration – not body maintenance. They are basically slowly decomposing. Once the fish dies on the spawning grounds the process of decomposition accelerates quickly.

Secondly, one of the problems with some of this investigative fish health work is that you do not really know if your sample is a dud until you have gone through all the steps to prepare the sample for testing. Kind of bummer when a scientist goes through the whole lengthy process to prepare a sample for testing only to find it is useless. Too bad for him/her because the money spent on that dud has already been spent trying to prepare it. That is no small expense – especially if you are working with a limited budget. Testing (especially microbiology) is not cheap, neither are the materials needed to prepare the samples. Even if money was not so limiting it doesn’t make sense to collect questionable fish and testing them because you can just be wasting time and proving nothing in the process. Better to do it right from the start and get the best fish possible – fresh live. With resources being the way they are in government there are not hundreds of people waiting to sample hundreds of carcasses either.

Thirdly, even if you were to find ISAv, PRV or some other pathogen in a prespawn fish it is not that easy to determine what caused the death of that fish. Many people think it is simple to find the “culprit” in a carcass, but that is simply not true. If you were to find ISAv in a prespawn fish it does not necessarily mean that the fish died of ISA. How do you separate out evidence of HSMI from the evidence of decomposition in a carcass on the spawning grounds – dead for who knows how long? If you find a “mushy” heart in a carcass does that mean it was HSMI or a result of cellular breakdown processes that happen in decomposing salmon? In reality, a salmon carcass can have a variety of endemic pathogens found upon examination by the pros – not just one or two. To pick out one culprit amongst many in a carcass (who knows how long it has been dead for) that has been undergoing decomposition is simply not that easy - if not impossible. If the carcass is tainted or rotten you could be just wasting your time. Lastly, you can also have situations on the spawning grounds where there is high prevalence of a pathogen (i.e. IHNv) but the number of prespawn mortalities can be very low or very high. As Dave correctly indicated you have to consider environmental conditions like water temperatures which are presently above normal in the Fraser. I am not advocating not testing for other things, but some perspective is needed so we are not thinking that we will simply find what we are looking for in these carcasses.

 

[Birdsnest]

Obviously you read how different the communication was between myself and sockeyefry where we were able to openly debate the pros and cons over the available science. Can you not see how different and typically immature your communication has been in this forum?

Ya, speaking of behaviour of this Side and that side do you recall how sockeye fry left the forum. He was threatened by Charlie. That was mature and professional wasn't it. No apology or nothing. I thought that was disgusting behaviour and it really shed light on his personality. For a guy who has read all the threads you should be aware that pretty much any abuse that has been dished out here has Been primarily by those apposed to salmon farming. Get lost, idiot, shill, scab, uneducated, moron. All terms used by your team. Real cool.

 

[agentaqua]

Actually PSM refers to Prespawn Mortality. ...I am not advocating not testing for other things, but some perspective is needed so we are not thinking that we will simply find what we are looking for in these carcasses.

Thanks for your reply Shuswap.

1st - apologies for the PSM. I thought I had written "pre", but I see instead I wrote "post". Must've been thinking abt post-mortem exams.

2nd - agree on logistical issues/constraints. Can be quite difficult, but not impossible to get samples. You did neglect to mention RNALater - one of the "newly" developed preservatives (expensive at $1 a ml) that can be used to sample and preserve tissues for fish health analyses which gets around the fresh sample issue.

3rd - You also neglected to mention the constraints/limitations of what DFO tests for and how they test (see the web link I posted a few postings back).

It is a complex issue - BUT DFO (as far as I know) does not test for PRV/HMSI and only tests for a few segments of ISA from just a few viruses (e.g. IHN). Their testing regieme (up until last year) only tested for a few viruses at enhancement facilities. Last year was the 1st year that they started a more comprehensive surveillence piece that still has many limitations and unverified asumptions regarding capture methodologies and numbers of samples - along with the limitations of their ISA/PCR lab methodology. It is far from a comprehensive testing regieme.

4th - the potential effects from a newly released disease upon a naive population should not be dismissed or overlooked. There are many examples of this destructive mistake world-wide. ALL vets and risk assessment and management protocols state that there should be complete separation between cultured stocks and wild ones - something impossible to do with the open net-cage technology.

yes, there are many variables that potentially affect population health and numbers as you, myself and other posters have recognized and discussed.

However, I am astounded by how cavaliar certain DFO reps sound when they regurgitate PR talking notes handed down from the communications branch. The potential implications are certainly not lost on DFO/CFIAs lawyers in Ottawa. they are scared to death of the public having access to data that confirm ISA and PRV have been released by fish farms (the only plausible source).

You might not be aware of the policy of secrecy and information control coming from Ottawa if you are not the one looking for information - but I can tell you 1st hand - there is a very large cover-up going-on in DFO at higher levels.

If there is nothing to hide - then lets see the data. that would relieve many people of their fustration and fear of what is going on.

DFO already knows ISA and PRV has been released into wild populations and is covering it up to protect the net-cage industry and that trade in fish products - and their own incompetence and liability.

Just because CK and other FF boosters don't wish to believe this and want to paint others with legitimate concerns as only people with "conspiracy theories" - means to me that they have had little experience in this process and are afraid of the ramifications when the data is finally fished-out and the implications are realized to the public.

one word - liability. It's a word that their lawyers are well aware of and scared of too.

They are already prepping their defense by releasing PR talking notes that CK has picked-up from the BCSFA we page: "Wasn't us", "Can't prove it", "Must've been stock outplanting in the 50-70's or before", etc, etc.

 

[Charlie]

Ya, speaking of behaviour of this Side and that side do you recall how sockeye fry left the forum. He was threatened by Charlie. That was mature and professional wasn't it. No apology or nothing. I thought that was disgusting behaviour and it really shed light on his personality. For a guy who has read all the threads you should be aware that pretty much any abuse that has been dished out here has Been primarily by those apposed to salmon farming. Get lost, idiot, shill, scab, uneducated, moron. All terms used by your team. Real cool.

Good point, Birdsnest and there shall NEVER be an “apology or nothing” when someone posts “wave of inconsequential drivel pass over” and refers to others as “pundits” and then considers a response made to another “offensive and condescending”?

If you don’t like what the others call you and don’t believe you will find any of those terms ever used by me; YOU are sowing those seeds and surely reap your crop of names.

Shall we look who actually started that, who blew it completely out of proportion shall we? It was YOU pro feedlot “HACKS”!

You can start reading here:
http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum...fish-farm-rejected-risk-to-wild-salmon/page47

Nah just letting the wave of inconsequential drivel pass over. "

... No the ultimate final nail in the coffin of CC, which no supporter ever mentions is the huge amount of freshwater which would be necessary. According to ASF's own report, one farm producing 3300 mt would require 7600 lpm of new freshwater (That's 7600 liters of water every minute of every day). This can't be from surface water, which may contain diseased wild salmon, which could infect the farm. It has to be water from drilled wells. At current industry production of somewhere in the order of 60,000 mt a year, that would require finding a minimum of 138,000 lpm. of feshwater from ground water aquifers. That's 198,720,000 liters of freshwater a day every day. So for pundits to espouse CC as a replacement for the entire industry, I would suggest you ask them where's the water going to come from, and what's the impact on other users and watersheds when all that water is sucked from the ground?

Thanks for the info on water needs, SF. I take it that number is only for the freshwater smolts stage - not for a grow-out in SW? ... ?

My response to agentaqua – NOT sockeyefry2 and refers to examples of using “saltwater”:

I don't think you need to worry much about water supply! Last time I checked, BC is on the west coast with some pristine wilderness with access to the waters of the Pacific Ocean. Are you aware the Pacific Ocean has 707.5 million km(3) of water,..? IF... your industry can't figure out how to filter it, maybe you should contact 'SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment'... !

If you don't believe YOUR "open net fish pens" are on their way out, I suggest you read the 'CLOSED CONTAINMENT SALMON AQUACULTURE' Report of the Standing Committee on Fisheries and Oceans
http://www.parl.gc.ca/content/hoc/Committee/411/FOPO/Reports/RP5994887/foporp03/foporp03-e.pdf

And the response received - from one the post is not even addressed to?

Charles

I don't read about Recircs and Closed Comtainment systems. I design, construct and operate them, and have been for over 10 years. I know what they can and can't do. I find your post to be offensive and condescending in nature.

I find your single purpose presence hear shrilling for the net pen industry “offensive and condescending” not to mention self serving and motivated by personal gain since it is where you sell your knowledge as you have previously indicated you do not want to give them advice for free. One gets the impression your shrilling for them is nothing more than one continues job/contract interview.

I have few problems with your skills being used for closed containment or land based fish farms but I and many British Columbians do have concerns about Alien Atlantic Salmon in open net pens in our inlets and as you put it, having negative interactions with wild salmon.

No, we don’t care if it will add to cost and decrease profits for Norwegian fish farm corporations or even close them down. We do care about Pacific Salmon and Trout and our local fisheries, the coastal economy and our way of life. We don ’think the greed of a few should be allowed to destroy all that.

So, someone has just posted “wave of inconsequential drivel pass over” and refers to others as “pundits” and then considers a response made to another is “offensive and condescending” and I responde with:

You do understand I have the ability to track your IP address, right?

And let’s see WHO really jumps all over that?

Charles,

So what.

I'm not a Net Penner, and I could care less if another salmon ever gets grown in BC. Doesn't affect me one bit.

What I thought was occuring here was an exchange, a discussion. I've learned lots here, and I hope I've added something to the knowledge base.

You start talking like that. Making threats, and bullying, really shows what the anti salmon farm campaign is all about.

You consider having the ability to track an IP address as “Making threats, and bullying” –WOW! Hate to inform, but the fish farming industry has been tracking Morton’s, and others, including mine for YEARS. I actually don’t have anything to hide and suggest one taking that as any type of threat and bullying just might?

You have actually have contributed quite a bit of good information throughout the years, with some good information posted, with references. That is what creates the exchange of information and discussion. Recently, I have to agree with agentaqua:

So… X2
Are you reading your posts or starting to fall into that PR hype BS the industry produces?

You are “not a Net Penner, and I could care less if another salmon ever gets grown in BC. Doesn't affect me one bit.”

Hello - yes it does:

BTW… maybe you should take that 10 years of experience and rather than not reading, start reading some of the things people who have been doing it for over 20 years and what they are accomplishing?
http://www.conservationfund.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/03/FI-ASF_Final-Report_March-2013.pdf

Sure glad you included “for the production of market salmon” in that statement, as there are many saltwater closed containment facilities that have been in operation for many YEARS! Like this one:

WOWW Exhibit
The window is almost 20 feet high by nearly 40 feet wide and holds 120,000 gallons of water. The window is made of 12.5 inch thick acrylic. Salt water is pumped in from Puget Sound and flows back to the Sound after passing through the exhibit. The water temperature in the exhibit is the same as the water outside, about 50 degrees Fahrenheit (about 10 degrees Celsius). All of the animals are native to Washington waters. Our animals are fed a diet of krill, anchovies or herring and squid; they receive a balanced diet and mix of roughage, fat, protein and carbohydrates to ensure their health.
http://www.seattleaquarium.org/document.doc?id=387

Another BTW… Lately, I find your posts are becoming not only offensive and condescending also belittling and attacking in nature!

Don't want to stir the pot, just curious a to how you have this ability?

There is no peer-peer communication on vbulletin and therefore no method for one user to track another's IP address. All communication is to and from the sportfishingbc.com server. The administrators of the site do see the IP address of each user but unless you are an admin then you don't. Or perhaps the admins are willing to give you this info.

Regardless, even if you were to find out the IP of a user all that would tell you is their ISP and approximate geographical location. So not really a threat no matter which way you look at it.

That is correct!

Charlie.

You know exactly what you were trying to do when you spoke of tracking adresses. That was sheer intimidation and bullying. To me who is not so computer savvy, it sounds alot like "I know wher you live" threat.

I shall address your last post then leave this forum:

The Seattle Aqarium is NOT a commercial Closed Containment system for the production of Market Salmon. It is a ZOO for aquatic animals.

The Conservation Fund article you posted is the ASF article I have been referencing to get the total water requirements.

And no I really don't care if there ever is another salmon farmed in BC. Shut em all down if you want.

Agent, I enjoyed swapping info with you. Maybe in the future the wild fish people and the farm people will figure out how to co exist to everyones benefit.

IMHO, "Charlie" should be sent to the penalty box for a significant period after this "missile over the bow". Clearly frustrated by others' arguments, he uses the "I can find you" threat. Empty, obviously, but on a largely anonymous forum, NOT COOL!!

I hope not. His posts are a hoot

So, I guess if it only takes a "threat" of being able to track ones IP address down to get those open net pens out of the oceans, I should suggest you pro feedlot "HACKS" start reading the news on how the U.S. is currently doing just that, along with easdropping on your cell phone!

 

[Birdsnest]

your a creepy american dude charlie. nuff said.

 

[GLG]

This story may be somewhat old but it shows whats going on here with these 3 "members".

[h=2]Shades of Green: The Sockeye Salmon Murder Mystery[/h] Written by Ray Grigg Saturday, 17 September 2011 15:49
The puzzle of British Columbia's disappearing Fraser River sockeye is unfolding like a classical murder mystery. Suspects abound. Suspicion has fallen on such culprits as atypical ocean predators, unusual algae blooms, overfishing, inadequate food supplies, and threatening high temperatures in both marine and river ecologies. Each suspect has been carefully investigated and each may have inflicted some injury on the hapless sockeye. But the prime suspect is the salmon farming industry, the Norwegian corporations that have located multitudes of open net-pens in BC's West Coast waters - many crucially situated along the migration routes of the victimized sockeye.

The salmon farming industry possesses the three primary characteristics that make it the prime suspect in this murder investigation: motive, opportunity and means.

The motive is profit. Corporations have discovered that open net-pens are the most lucrative way of rearing farmed salmon. When Norway tightened restrictions on its salmon farming industry because of the proliferation of diseases and parasites in North Atlantic wild salmonids, Norwegian corporations saw their profits being constrained by controls and costs. Their quest for continuing expansion and profit was curtailed.

The perfect opportunity for expansion and profits appeared in coastal BC. The province was eager to boost coastal economies with a new industry, the waters were pristine and cold, regulations were minimal, and supervision was casual, trusting and accommodating. The corporations, of course, promised investment and jobs. This new environment was open, innocent and unburdened by the experience and disasters that had occurred in the North Atlantic. BC was the perfect opportunity to expand the industry and satisfy ever-hungry shareholders.

Corporate character and history are also relevant in this murder mystery. When salmon farming was known to cause environmental problems in North Atlantic waters, when countries such as Norway, Scotland, Ireland and England all had negative experiences with salmon farming, the Norwegian corporations knew that suspicion would likely fall on similar operations in BC. Indeed, parasites and diseases have plagued operations wherever open net-pen salmon farming has been practiced. If corporate practice transferred disastrous viral infections to Chilean waters, then precedent and logic must conclude that these same corporations and operations could bring similar problems to the West Coast. So the corporate defensive strategy has been to separate the events that have occurred elsewhere from those unfolding here.

In a global village interconnected by information sources, however, this strategy is transparently facile and obvious. Numerous independent Norwegian scientists, with long North Atlantic salmon farming experience, have repeatedly warned that the same problems occurring in open net-pen operations there are inevitable in BC. A conspicuous corporate strategy of separating the two situations only arouses suspicion - although evasion suggests guilt, suspicion itself is not incriminating.

Neither is it incriminating that the salmon farming industry always professes its absolute innocence, invariably denying any connection between its practices and any harm to BC's wild salmon. Its defensive strategy is to argue that no condemning studies are ever conclusive - even though many sea lice studies have repeatedly confirmed harm. Despite the overwhelming weight of incriminating circumstantial evidence, its corporate response is to encourage further investigation - ad nauseam. Repeat definitive studies. Get more data. Quibble about details. Solicit contradictory opinions. "Me thinks," as Hamlet said of his mother's guilt, "she doth protest too much."

No corporation engaged in a harmless practice needs a public relations company to polish an image, especially if that company is Hill and Knowlton, described as one of the world's slickest "spin machines" ‹ the same one employed by tobacco companies to deny the cancerous effects of smoking, by Exxon to clean its reputation after its disastrous oil spill in Alaska, and by dictatorships to cover the blood and torture of abominable politics. Since the character of a reputable corporation speaks for itself, suspicion is automatically aroused when extreme measures are needed to improve a public image.

The last criteria for identifying a prime suspect is means - did the suspect have the capability of committing the crime? Open net-pens containing millions of salmon in feed-lot conditions undeniably pollute the immediate benthic environment with feces, waste food, antibiotics and the toxins to control sea lice. And the natural sea lice cycle, sustained every year by the migration of wild mature salmon to spawning and death in their nascent rivers, is broken by the continual presence of salmon in farms. The consequent damage to out-migrating wild smolts has been repeatedly demonstrated.

The latest and most serious evidence in the sockeye salmon murder mystery is the possibility that corporations have brought lethal or debilitating viral infections to the West Coast. Symptoms of infectious salmon anemia have been found. And Dr. Kristi Miller, a molecular geneticist who has been studying the decline of Fraser River sockeye - their diminishing returns happen to correspond to the placement of open net-pen salmon farms on their migration routes - has identified genetic markers that strongly suggest another unusual viral infection in wild fish. "It could be the smoking gun," she testified to the Cohen Commission established to investigate the mystery of the missing sockeye.

Judge Cohen has been receiving mounds of information, including reams of data about parasitic sea lice transferring from farmed to wild fish, and now new evidence suggesting fish farms have imported debilitating viruses to the BC's West Coast ecology. When his investigation is completed, he will deliberate and report on his findings. The prime suspect has not yet been convicted. But the mounting evidence is incriminating, and various accomplices are now implicated. The plot thickens.


Last modified on Tuesday, 20 September 2011 13:38
http://www.thecanadian.org/k2/item/...grigg-fraser-sockeye-salmon-cohen-aquaculture

 

[agentaqua]

I am not advocating not testing for other things, but some perspective is needed so we are not thinking that we will simply find what we are looking for in these carcasses.

maybe you could also tell that to DFO/CFIA and while you are at it - also describe to them what is science verses politics. Case in point, look at: http://www.watershed-watch.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/Exh-2065-NonRT.pdf

It's DFO's viral testing goals that explicitly state that they want to "confirm" that both ISA and IPN are "not present" in BC waters.

If they were in fact competent scientists who were not corrupted by political influences they would understand that:

1/ You can't prove a negative as CK has already pointed out earlier,
2/ They would recognize that their assertion that these viruses are "not present" is only an assertion that is under suspicion and probably wrong due to the many "unconfirmed" positives of ISA already reported on the Fraser, Cultus Lake, and River's inlet,
3/ That NO CREDIBLE RESEARCHER would ever write these as "goals", as saying they already knew what the outcome of what their results would be - INSTEAD they would state that they wanted to determine and verify the disease status in BC waters w/o predetermining the outcome of their findings, and
4/ it demonstrates how much political pressure they are under when applying for research $ when they state what outcome they want when performing science BEFORE they begin sampling.

Talk about "thinking that we will simply find what we are looking for in these carcasses".

these are the people we are told we should "trust" to get "unbiased" results - just because they are used to getting their way and intimidating any other competition for alternative research.

That's very "professional" - NOT!!!

 

[agentaqua]

Gov't Must Shift from Blaming "The Wild"

Government Must Shift from Blaming “The Wild” to Actually Solving Salmon Farming Woes

Editor's Note: At bottom of Press Release are downloadable files of a map of ISA infected sites on south coast Newfoundland in both black and white, and colour, and a backgrounder on ISA in Atlantic Canada


For immediate release
July 30, 2013

St Andrews-

The Atlantic Salmon Federation (ASF) is responding to recent remarks by government and industry in the media, blaming ‘the wild’ for recent outbreaks of Infectious Salmon Anemia (ISA) in the salmon farming industry. Yes, ISA is known to be in the wild, but its presence there was never a problem until net cages crowded with salmon caused epidemics. Another thought, if “the wild” is such a problem for the industry, why not try closed-containment, which would completely separate the industry from our valuable wild resources?

Jonathan Carr, ASF’s Director of Research and Environment, said, “Poor husbandry practices increase stress levels in fish which can lead to ISA outbreaks. Many farmed fish in close quarters in open net pens, along with the pens themselves in close proximity to each other, have the potential to spread the ISA virus like wildfire, resulting in massive kills of farmed salmon. When it comes to disease outbreaks and their imminent spread, there is a strong need for research on the interactions between wild and farmed salmon, and how the threats can be mitigated.”

Control of the many environmental impacts is a challenge because government and industry continue to deny the existence of these impacts, which slows progress towards effective management and husbandry. Government has also been close-minded to any new research and development into closed-containment facilities that would completely separate the farming of salmon from wild fish and the environment. Government continues to look upon open net pen salmon aquaculture as the remedy for unemployment in rural areas, despite interruptions in production, and the resulting significant loss of fish and jobs, due to ISA-caused fish kills.

When the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) orders the diseased fish killed, the industry is often compensated, and it continues to operate as before, collecting its 50% profits at the expense of our environment, fish and other sea creatures and the industries that depend on healthy wild populations.

There have been five outbreaks in the past year of ISA in the migration corridor for wild Atlantic salmon of the Conne and Little rivers. Beginning in July of 2012, there have been ISA outbreaks at Butter Cove, Pot Harbour, Goblin Cove, Pass My Can, and Manuel’s Arm that involved the destruction of approximately 1.8 million fish. All the diseased fish were in the direct path of migrating wild salmon, both outgoing smolt and returning adults. “The close proximity of cages and rampant spread of ISA suggests that this strain is spread from farm to farm, possibly by ocean currents, and this does not bode well for migrating wild salmon as they must pass in close proximity to the infected farms through the narrow Bay d’Espoir corridor,” continued Mr. Carr. The CFIA is still working with the company on compensation for the July 2012 outbreak at Butter Cove but $13 million was the figure given in one media report and that outbreak killed 450,000 farmed salmon.

When open net salmon farming operates near wild salmon, these populations decline at a faster rate than do wild salmon populations that are not adjacent to the industry. The Conne River salmon population has declined more than any other monitored river within the province of Newfoundland and Labrador (>70% decline from 1986 to 2011). The Committee on the Status of Endangered Wildlife in Canada (COSEWIC) has assessed the salmon populations of the Conne and Little rivers as threatened. ISA is not a new disease. It has followed the industry wherever it has operated in eastern Canada from New Brunswick, where the first outbreak was detected in 1996, to Nova Scotia and Newfoundland. It has caused massive losses for salmon farmers in Norway, Scotland, Chile, and the Faroes.

With this record, how could government not consider closed-containment salmon aquaculture as an option that warrants further investigation? ASF and the Conservation Fund Freshwater Institute encourage government and industry to attend an international summit on fish farming in land-based, closed-containment systems that they are hosting in Shepherdstown, West Virginia, September 4 to 6, 2013. We have partnered since 2011 to demonstrate the feasibility of producing farmed Atlantic salmon in land-based, recirculation aquaculture systems. This project is sustainably producing thousands of pounds of premium salmon that are receiving rave reviews from chefs, seafood distributors and the general public on taste and quality. The workshop will provide updates on research and development, including a chance to hear from entrepreneurs in the United States, Denmark, Canada, Chile, Holland, and Norway who are successfully growing fish this way.

Closed-containment needs to be considered as an alternative to open net pen fish farming, with its inherent escapes that threaten wild salmon in nearby rivers with genetic pollution, and the ongoing threats of disease, parasites and polluted sea floors below the cages. In the meantime, government and industry must implement better management practices for open net pens to minimize diseases such as ISA and its spread within Newfoundland’s once pristine bays.

-30-

The Atlantic Salmon Federation is dedicated to the conservation, protection and restoration of wild Atlantic salmon and the ecosystems on which their well-being and survival depend. ASF has a network of seven regional councils (New Brunswick, Nova Scotia, Newfoundland and Labrador, Prince Edward Island, Quebec, Maine and Western New England). The regional councils cover the freshwater range of the Atlantic salmon in Canada and the United States.

ASF Contact: Livia Goodbrand, Manager of Public Information: Lgoodbrand@asf.ca; 506-529-1033 (o); 506-469-1033 (c)

- See more at: http://www.asf.ca/gov-t-must-shift-from-blaming-the-wild-.html#sthash.97Y1N8If.dpuf

 

[agentaqua]

Backgrounder Atlantic Salmon Federation
P. O. Box 5200, St. Andrews, NB E5B 3S8
P. O. Box 807, Calais, ME USA 04619–0807
Tel: (506) 529–4581 www.asf.ca

July 2013

INFECTIOUS SALMON ANEMIA (ISA) – THE FACTS
General
• Infectious Salmon Anemia (ISA) is a virus that is highly contagious in the marine environment, spread through the water between Atlantic salmon within a grow-out site, and carried by the water from one site to another
• ISA is highly lethal to Atlantic salmon, but does not harm humans, according to all sources.
• ISA is complicated to diagnose, as there are both virulent and non-virulent forms of the virus. The virulent form occurs through mutation, possibly as the result of stress factors in the salmon. When a lab says “suspected” of having ISA, in part they are determining if the virulent form of ISA is present.
• ISA was only discovered in wild Atlantic salmon in 1999, but has been known in farmed Atlantic salmon from a much earlier date
• ISA was unknown to science prior to epidemics in the Norwegian salmon farming industry in 1984
• Disease symptoms include the salmon becoming lethargic or moribund, lifting of scales, protuberance of the eyes, skin lesions, pale gills, and internal hemorrhages.

Geographical Distribution
• ISA is found on both sides of the Atlantic Ocean, and at times has caused massive losses for salmon farmers in Norway, Scotland, and the Faroes.
• Norwegian salmon farms were the first to be affected, and, by 1990, 101 salmon farms were infected
• In Scotland, an outbreak in 1998 spread so that, by the following year, 11 sites were infected, and a further 24 sites were suspected of being infected, a total of 10% of Scotland's salmon farms. Since then there have been outbreaks from time to time.
• In the Faroe Islands the aquaculture industry was nearly wiped out by ISA outbreaks from 2001 to 2003, resulting in losses to the industry of DKK 250 Million

Canada and Maine

Recent History
• In 2013 ISA epidemics hit aquaculture operations in Jan. at Liverpool Bay, resulting in CFIA giving permission for Cooke Aquaculture to take the 240,000 potentially diseased salmon and process them at a plant in New Brunswick, the first time this has been allowed, and causing a national outcry. In June, 800,000 at Goblin Cove, farmed by Gray Aquaculture, were ordered to slaughter. This south coast Newfoundland site is within two miles of the migration route of smolt and returning salmon bound for the Conne River.
• In July 2013 ISA accelerated in the same area of Newfoundland, with the 21 cage Pass My Can site of 500,000 farmed salmon ordered destroyed, and 2 cages of a Cooke site at Manuel’s Arm (approx. 150,000 farmed salmon) ordered destroyed.
• In 2012 ISA epidemics hit aquaculture operations in first Nova Scotia and then Newfoundland, totalling at least 1,090,000 farmed salmon.
• Nova Scotia - In Feb. and in April, epidemic ISA resulted in the forced slaughter of 12 cages of salmon, approximately 250,000 salmon in Shelburne. A separate incident in July resulted in the slaughter at the Coffin Island site in Liverpool Bay of 4 cages, with at least 40,000 salmon
• Newfoundland - On the south coast, the Butter Cove site was forced to slaughter 450,000 farmed salmon due to ISA in July 2012. In December 2012 Cooke Aquaculture was ordered to destroy 350,000 salmon at their Pot Harbour site. Then 500,000 at Goblin Cove, 500,000 at Pass My Can, and 150,000 at Manuel’s Arm. All of these sites bracket the wild Atlantic salmon corridor to and from the Conne River.

History of ISA Epidemics

ATLANTIC CANADA (1996 - 2013)

Slaughter of ISA Farmed Salmon
• Between 1996 and 1999, ~ 4.5 million fish were slaughtered at 65 sites in New Brunswick.
• In 2000, 9 farm sites were infected and 1.5 million fish slaughtered.
• In 2002, 16 sites were infected and 2.4 million fish were slaughtered.
• In 2003, the sites infected began to drop to 10 and 405,000 fish were slaughtered.
• In 2007 at least 528,000 fish were destroyed
• In 2012 four sites (2 NS & 2 NL) had ISA - 1.2 million fish destroyed -
• In 2013 (to July 29) four sites (1 NS & 3 NL) had ISA - 1.74 millon fish slaughtered
• TOTAL FISH DESTROYED - MORE THAN 12.6 MILLION

Compensation
• 1996-1997: a combined federal and provincial total of $40.5 million was paid to the aquaculture industry following the first kill of salmon as a result of ISA detection.
• 1999: Federal government and provincial governments contributed a total of $25 million dollars under the terms of the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements.
• 2006: Following two years of ‘negotiations’ with the province, DFO finally contributed another $10 million to cover losses as a result of ISA.
• Thus by 2006 the total was $75.5 Million in compensation to growers
• 2007 - Compensation unknown - perhaps $7 Million (low estimate)
• 2012 - Compensation (guesstimate) - $26 Million
• 2013 - Compensation - remains undetermined at this time
• TOTAL COMPENSATION - MORE THAN $100 MILLION, perhaps $108 to $110 Million
MAINE, USA (2001-2005)
• 2001 - 2.5 million fish destroyed
• 2002 & 2003 - 150,000 fish destroyed
• $5.8M compensation directly, and another $2.5M was paid out directly by USDA to clean up the sites.
• No outbreaks since 2005

Pacific Ocean
• Chile's aquaculture industry was partly destroyed by widespread outbreaks of ISA in the past several years, resulting in the deaths of 10's of millions of fish, and the loss of thousands of jobs in the industry.
Chile is now trying to rebuild on a healthier model, but outbreaks continue to occur.
• In British Columbia, there were reports of ISA showing up in wild and aquaculture salmon, but the tests have proven inconclusive at this point. There is great fear as to impact on wild salmon species in BC

ISA Transmission and the Environment
• ISA likely infects fish via the gills and possibly by ingestion
• ISA is shed in urine, feces, epidermal mucus, gonadal fluids, blood and through tissue wastes when farmed salmon are slaughtered and processed.
• ISA thrives in cold water temperatures (5-15 celcuis). It does not survive at temperatures exceeding mid 20s.
• ISA can be transmitted either through the water or by close contact between fish.
• Sealice might act as mechanical vectors. They may also increase the susceptibility of fish to infection by stressing the salmon
• Wild fish may act as carriers. Salmonids might be the natural reservoir of the ISA Virus
• It remains uncertain whether adult Atlantic salmon can transfer the virus to eggs within the adult, but some scientists believe the non-virulent form of the virus can be transmitted this way
• ISA normally occurs in the salmon’s marine life stage, and only rarely has been reported among young fish
• There appear to be two yearly peaks of the disease – early summer and winter
• ISA is highly contagious, and besides Atlantic salmon can affect economically important species that include cod, herring and mackeral.

Controlling ISA
• ISA being highly contagious, it is necessary to slaughter immediately all the fish in any site suspected of having the disease
• It requires two positives within a cage of salmon for the cage depopulation to be ordered.
• Bay-wide management with single year classes has been implemented to attempt to control the outbreak of ISA. Overall it is successful, but there are still outbreaks, and those will result in widespread death of farmed salmon
• ISA require the expenditure of many millions of dollars to control and deal with the disease. The costs begin with disinfection, and may include use of vaccine
• The industry, wherever it exists, should use only ISA virus-free broodstock ISA in Wild Salmon
• ASF was the first to find ISA in wild Atlantic salmon in North America, when several individuals were tested on entering the Magaguadavic River fish ladder.
• The impact on wild Atlantic salmon remains an uncertain area, but there is great concern for individual salmon swimming through areas where farmed salmon are infected.
• Wild salmon are less susceptible to ISA than farmed salmon. It could be related to genetics or increased stress in farmed populations

Latest update July 29, 2013

http://0101.nccdn.net/1_5/0a4/0e9/05a/isa-backgrounderv7.pdf

 

[ClayoquotKid]

Compensation
• 1996-1997: a combined federal and provincial total of $40.5 million was paid to the aquaculture industry following the first kill of salmon as a result of ISA detection.
• 1999: Federal government and provincial governments contributed a total of $25 million dollars under the terms of the Disaster Financial Assistance Arrangements.
• 2006: Following two years of ‘negotiations’ with the province, DFO finally contributed another $10 million to cover losses as a result of ISA.
• Thus by 2006 the total was $75.5 Million in compensation to growers
• 2007 - Compensation unknown - perhaps $7 Million (low estimate)
• 2012 - Compensation (guesstimate) - $26 Million
• 2013 - Compensation - remains undetermined at this time
• TOTAL COMPENSATION - MORE THAN $100 MILLION, perhaps $108 to $110 Million

Any chance you can provide some links to support these numbers?