Fishmyster
Well-Known Member
Maybe its PVR or a similar virus that has killed off all the insects? Does this get me back in?
Peer Review concludes PRV transfer from Atlantic salmon farms poses minimal risk t
- Thread starter Birdsnest
- Start date
GLG
Well-Known Member
So what your trying to tell us that 2 Canadian court cases that say you can't put PRV atlantic salmon smolts in the ocean is somehow not good enough because you found a old American report that says they don't think PRV causes HSMI. Brilliant argument /sarc off.
Were way past that excuse now as even the fish farms have conceded that point.
You know that even the Auditor General of Canada finds DFO is a fail on this issue of protecting wild salmon. No wonder they lost the court case.
http://www.oag-bvg.gc.ca/internet/English/parl_cesd_201804_01_e_42992.html
GLG
Well-Known Member
Just stop it.........
We know that the smolts that leave the streams are having the problems in the first year of life in the ocean. This is a fact not some guess based on feelings. I have been around this stuff for 15 years and I can tell you first hand that I agree with this fact. How do I know? Because I have run the experiment many times in those years. We can measure the smolt to adult ratio of wild to hatchery. The wild beats them every time so if your idea was correct then the hatchery would be the winner as we feed them.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Except when you compare cowichan to Harrison. Then something funky is going on
Birdsnest
Well-Known Member
Fishmyster
Well-Known Member
You seem to be blinded by your own conclusions. I have been observing stream ecology for over 35 years and watched the depopulation of insects. Only in your head is the ocean having the larger cut in salmonid productivity. Last time you posted a report where there was marine smolt-adult ratio was compared with FW adult-smolt ratios the conclusion was different than the information in the report. Yes, the report conclusion contradicted the stats in the report yet you continued to believe the bs conclusion. Well if you are going to continue to promote this fictitious information then I feel obligated to expose the other real world issues at play. Are you going to dare to discuss Gold, Thompson or Stamp river videos I posted or are you and the other ENGO drones going to just keep your blinders on to avoid any embarrassment of being wrong?? Maybe you can come up with some report that explains how fish have now adapted to eat sticks and stones. lol!
For those of you out there that are reading these conversations but not responding, be aware of how easy it is to deceit by just written information!! Just like buying a car or house, do not just trust an unseen sale. Written information is often biased and incorrectly representing a situation. Just because these ENGO advocated have closed their doors to any new information please be aware and allow yourself to have an open mind to new information and science as it comes available.
Birdsnest
Well-Known Member
I think you going after the wrong poster. Clearly agent started the derail on ph. Just saying.
They don't. It all gets spent doing other science. Thanks to NGO's
Last edited:
browningmirage
Active Member
It's also easy to get so engrossed in one thing that you begin to see it as the ONLY cause.
In terms of smolt yield, I haven't seen major changes in my 15 years in the field. Annual variations sure, but not boom or bust. For the long term datasets we do see a slight increase in productivity over time (generally thought to be related to maturing riparian habitat that was leveled before FPC). We do however see a DRASTIC drop in marine survival, literally hemisphere wide somewhere around 1990. Check out "declivityin steelhead recruitment at the Keogh River over the past decade" by B.R. Ward. With almost 20 years since the publish date, I dont tend to agree with his proposed mechanism, but the drop in marine survival is a fact.
Let's throw some numbers around. 60,000 coho smolts is a decent yield for those typical coho streams...not rivers, not creeks, good rearing habitat but not too much. Marine survival at 10% gets you 6k adults back. 5% you get 3k. 2.5 you get 1.5k. Now imagine the present marine survival for some of these streams that has dipped as low as 0.2%.
So say we deal with your pH problem for these coho streams. Do we double smolt yield to 120k... at that marine survival that yields only 240.
Something is Fd up in the ocean. We need to fix that, because gains in the freshwater will only be meaningful if they manage to survive the death trap that is now the ocean.
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
And yet using your numbers, 29 years later we still have no ideal about the why of the marine survival.
One would think that between Canada and the US someone would know?
One would think that between Canada and the US someone would know?
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
Harbor District Approves Lease for Massive Fish Farm
Posted By Kimberly Wear @kimberly_wear on Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:29 PM
Kimberly Wear
click to enlarge
The plan is to build a land-based aquaculture facility that would eventually produce some 25,000 tons of fish a year – likely salmon or steelhead – to serve as the West Coast hub for Nordic Aquafarms, which is currently in the process of developing an East Coast equivalent in Belfast, Maine.
The agreement comes with two automatic 10-year renewals but also includes a three-year option, or “planning period,” during which the company will be pursuing the necessary permits before the full lease would go into effect.
During that time, Nordic will pay the harbor district $20,000 a year. The rent will increase to $159,128 annually after the three-year mark. Included in the terms is the right for the company to discharge 6 million gallons of wastewater per day using the site’s ocean outfall pipe, which extends 1.5 miles offshore.
Nordic would also pay a $500,000 fee to access the district’s electric substation.
The facility will use a recirculating aquaculture system, or RAS, which utilizes large tanks and water treatment systems, a method the company says prevents many of the common issues associated with raising fish in offshore pens, including pollution from waste, chemical use and the potential to pass on diseases and parasites to wild fish.
Read previous Journal coverage of the fish farm proposal here.
Nordic Aquafarms Concept from Netron on Vimeo.
Several commissioners said the item before the harbor board was just about the land and this was only the start of a long process that will have ample opportunity for public comment.
“This is step one,” Commissioner Larry Doss said. “This is the beginning of due diligence.”
With the lease approval coming immediately after the first details were aired publicly, one speaker called the decision a “missed opportunity for engagement.”
Others in the standing-room-only crowd — many identifying themselves as being involved in commercial fishing — also noted that they wished the harbor district would put more effort into maintaining the harbor for those who are still trying to make a living off the sea, and some questioned whether the fish farm would end up being their competitor.
“We’re going to be selling fish and you’re going to be selling fish, so I think there’s some conflict there,” one speaker said.
Erik Heim, the company’s founder and U.S. president who attended the harbor district meeting, said local input is a “key component” for the company and noted he understood the concerns of local fishermen, saying he would like to “look for opportunities to work together.”
Still, the project — touted to bring millions to the local economy and employee at least 80 people — had its share of supporters, including Fourth District Supervisor Virginia Bass, who said the fish farm proposal would be one of the largest economic investments in the county “since the end of the 20th century.”
“This opportunity represents, to me, the rebirth of the peninsula,” she said.
Look for expanded coverage of the fish farm proposal in this week’s edition of the Journal.
Posted By Kimberly Wear @kimberly_wear on Mon, Feb 11, 2019 at 8:29 PM
Kimberly Wear
click to enlarge
- Mark McKenna
- Fourth District Supervisor Virginia Bass speaks at the crowded hearing.
The plan is to build a land-based aquaculture facility that would eventually produce some 25,000 tons of fish a year – likely salmon or steelhead – to serve as the West Coast hub for Nordic Aquafarms, which is currently in the process of developing an East Coast equivalent in Belfast, Maine.
The agreement comes with two automatic 10-year renewals but also includes a three-year option, or “planning period,” during which the company will be pursuing the necessary permits before the full lease would go into effect.
During that time, Nordic will pay the harbor district $20,000 a year. The rent will increase to $159,128 annually after the three-year mark. Included in the terms is the right for the company to discharge 6 million gallons of wastewater per day using the site’s ocean outfall pipe, which extends 1.5 miles offshore.
Nordic would also pay a $500,000 fee to access the district’s electric substation.
The facility will use a recirculating aquaculture system, or RAS, which utilizes large tanks and water treatment systems, a method the company says prevents many of the common issues associated with raising fish in offshore pens, including pollution from waste, chemical use and the potential to pass on diseases and parasites to wild fish.
Read previous Journal coverage of the fish farm proposal here.
Nordic Aquafarms Concept from Netron on Vimeo.
Several commissioners said the item before the harbor board was just about the land and this was only the start of a long process that will have ample opportunity for public comment.
“This is step one,” Commissioner Larry Doss said. “This is the beginning of due diligence.”
With the lease approval coming immediately after the first details were aired publicly, one speaker called the decision a “missed opportunity for engagement.”
Others in the standing-room-only crowd — many identifying themselves as being involved in commercial fishing — also noted that they wished the harbor district would put more effort into maintaining the harbor for those who are still trying to make a living off the sea, and some questioned whether the fish farm would end up being their competitor.
“We’re going to be selling fish and you’re going to be selling fish, so I think there’s some conflict there,” one speaker said.
Erik Heim, the company’s founder and U.S. president who attended the harbor district meeting, said local input is a “key component” for the company and noted he understood the concerns of local fishermen, saying he would like to “look for opportunities to work together.”
Still, the project — touted to bring millions to the local economy and employee at least 80 people — had its share of supporters, including Fourth District Supervisor Virginia Bass, who said the fish farm proposal would be one of the largest economic investments in the county “since the end of the 20th century.”
“This opportunity represents, to me, the rebirth of the peninsula,” she said.
Look for expanded coverage of the fish farm proposal in this week’s edition of the Journal.
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
Included in the terms is the right for the company to discharge 6 million gallons of wastewater per day using the site’s ocean outfall pipe, which extends 1.5 miles offshore.
browningmirage
Active Member
Fishmyster
Well-Known Member
Well I don't know where you were before your fifteen years of service but this die off started happening 30 years ago. If your personal involvement went back to the mid 1980's or earlier you probably wouldn't be arguing this with me.
I have read the Keogh study many times. There was no invertebrate monitoring or water quality science applied. If they had added both these aspects of stream productivity to the study we all would know that acid rain kills ecology here in B.C. too! We would also understand that the dissolved heavy metals coming from every stream during heavy acidic events were precipitating in the coastal waters as the pH rises. We would understand that the continuous flow of fresh water does effect the fish far past the counting fence and into the sea. This is the missing gap in knowledge. It's out there but we are in the stone ages here in Canada and nobody even knows the bugs had died off.
You say fix the ocean? How could you do that? If we could ever think about treating the ocean it would be by treating the never ending freshwater input that mobilizes the toxic substances during ph drops.
Not sure why you are hung up on the coho numbers? What about all the other species like SH, CHK, SOC??? Are you able to look at the videos I posted on the freshwater thread? Can you not understand that the lack of invertebrate abundance and diversity is a problem worth looking at? The high profile rivers I sample that are in a fish crisis have no food webs!!! Why not try to understand what is wrong in the freshwaters and laying right there in front of us? Why not think outside the box a little here, pick up the books of ecology and chemistry and figure out why these important fish streams have so little ecology??
browningmirage
Active Member
I never disagreed that freshwater ecology is worth looking at.
I very strongly disagree that it is the only thing we should be looking at.
How do we fix the ocean? Look at the ways we are potentially negatively impacting it. Which brings us right back to the purpose of this thread.
Those ENGOs that everyone seems happy to dump on? TBH their only crime is to hold industry accountable. Where would we be without ENGOs? Who do you think started mobilizing the world on acid rain?
When there is money to be made, there will be shortcuts taken, usually at the expense of the environment. By making a big deal, ENGOs have literally driven responsible environmental policies in this country.
Last edited:
Birdsnest
Well-Known Member
Ya, thats a bit of a long shot. Ya, holding industries accountable in the past but it doesn't give them a licence to be right without proof.
The precautionary principle allows for this and NGO's are having a love affair with the Canadian court system based on this type of empowerment. Basically, if science can't give them results then the courts have to and these decisions lack quantification.
Some will think this is a good idea over there however empowering this system of decision making again makes it posable in other sections of fisheries. Like the SRKW issue. So maybe sport fishing is having an effect on the SRKW populations but at an unquantifiable level. Better apply the precautionary principle and shut it down, just in case. And the sport fishing community is left to prove something that isn't happening.
Do a web search called the problems with the precautionary principle. There is plenty of reading on the net thats basically rings the same. And its interesting too. I promise its not endless hours of reading to get the idea of what I am getting at here.
You have me confused as you stated earlier that Canada is spending hundreds of millions on this sort of stuff. See your post #56 "Hmm. Well Alaska is suffering a king salmon crisis as well. No farms there and the experts there do not seem to think PRV is an issue for their kings or any other species of pacific salmon in their area.
Same can be said for the Skeena spring salmon.
https://www.dnr.wa.gov/sites/defaul...epaper revised Sept 2017.pdf?3c0h5&g0ewylow29
Interesting how Alaska gets to avoid spending hundreds of millions on this sort of stuff and here in canada its spend spend spend."
It's ALWAYS the indutry's job to demonstrate that either they will have no deleterious effects - or that the effects can be mitigated. That's the basis of an environmental assessment - wait! - something the open net-pen industry has been exempt from. How did that happen?
browningmirage
Active Member
Have you ever noticed that you get sick more frequently when you are stressed?
And to quote one J. Mark Shrimpton: temperature is the most important factor determining fish health and distribution worldwide.
So is it much wonder that the northern stocks are doing poorly, when the northern latitudes (I.e. Skeena north) are warming at double the rates experienced by southerly rivers.
I dont think it a stretch to suggest that a migrating salmon has a threshold limit for stress beyond which it cannot survive. Make those stressors up out of temperature, disease, poor forage quality, or a combination thereof...
So no, similar trends experienced north of us dont necessarily mean that all the same factors are at play. It could, but I suspect the rapidly warming temperatures are filling the gaps left by other stressors that our fish experience down here.
An apparently similar response, but due to entirely or partially different mechanisms.
Fishmyster
Well-Known Member
Are you saying these present days anti ff ENGO's are the ones that brought awareness to the acid rain issue years ago? Weird that I haven't noticed their logo's on past chemistry studies.
I am all for studying the ocean too but to turn your back on the freshwater ecology collapse because the old boys club doesn't believe it is absolutely foolish.
I just don't believe the anti ff science because it doesn't match the coastal stock status and there is plenty of contradicting science from other science providers that are just as credible. I chose to believe my own eyes and not ENGO propaganda. I must be immune to their virus. There is money to be made with this salmon crisis and ENGO's have figured out how to do it. Like you say, "if there is money to be made there will be shortcuts taken". This one is being at the expense of ff industry from the precautionary principle.
From what I see the purpose of this thread was to show other open minded people that there is science contradicting ENGO anti ff science. It just causes all the ENGO patrons to have AFD attacks and bombard the thread with ENGO mentality.
Similar threads
