Peer Review concludes PRV transfer from Atlantic salmon farms poses minimal risk t

[Birdsnest]

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?

Predictably you will think that the FF industry is exempt. You apparently are not acknowledging the article I posted on the other thread.

http://www.sirc.org/articles/beware.html

This form of pre-scientific thinking presents a serious obstacle to rational discussion. The absence of an effect can never be proved , in the way that I cannot prove that there are no fairies at the bottom of my garden. All I can say are two things: firstly, sustained observation over the past 20 years has revealed no evidence of their presence, and secondly the existence of fairies, in my garden or elsewhere, is very unlikely on a priori grounds. This is how science works – precisely in accord with the principles of Karl Popper that hypotheses cannot be proved, only refuted.

 

[GLG]

You totally failed to address my point that spring salmon returns are suffering up and down the coast just where there are and aren't salmon farms including areas like alaska(long ways away from farms) and the skeena. So why are all the other areas suffering equally?

Look I'm well aware of why there are problem with current salmon returns. That's because I read and understand the material that DFO publishes each year. The question is do you? This all was predicted back a few years ago when this site made us aware of the "blob" and then El Niño. We knew this was coming and just another added stress to our salmon.
https://acsbc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Preliminary-2019-Salmon-Outlook_v5_FINAL.pdf
I can't control ocean temps but PRV is something that we can control. Browns Bay fish process plant dumping PRV blood into a choke point on the salmon migration route is a terrible idea. Thank goodness that this problem will be fixed. Putting PRV infected atlantic smolts into the ocean is another bad idea. Twice now the courts have agreed that it's wrong. Face the facts and live up to our obligation as recreational anglers to put our salmon first.

 

[agentaqua]

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.

Yet ANOTHER excellent post, BM.

To add to your post - in order to get positive reactions in fish cell cultures inoculated with some of these viruses - the temperature has to be above a certain level. In other words - high temperatures trigger virus activation. That's something very serious when one looks at the increasing summer temperatures in both the ocean and the freshwater...

 

[GLG]

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.

Face facts Fishmyster wild salmon smolts do better then hatchery smolts. Hatchery smolts are feed every day by staff so they are not influenced by a lack of bugs in the water. Until you can prove otherwise with peer reviewed science papers then I will go with what the science says.

Coho marine survival over time. Blue represents wild stocks.

https://marinesurvivalproject.com/w...nd-hatchery-coho-salmon-in-the-Salish-Sea.pdf

 

[Birdsnest]

Look I'm well aware of why there are problem with current salmon returns. That's because I read and understand the material that DFO publishes each year. The question is do you? This all was predicted back a few years ago when this site made us aware of the "blob" and then El Niño. We knew this was coming and just another added stress to our salmon.
https://acsbc.ca/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/Preliminary-2019-Salmon-Outlook_v5_FINAL.pdf
I can't control ocean temps but PRV is something that we can control. Browns Bay fish process plant dumping PRV blood into a choke point on the salmon migration route is a terrible idea. Thank goodness that this problem will be fixed. Putting PRV infected atlantic smolts into the ocean is another bad idea. Twice now the courts have agreed that it's wrong. Face the facts a live up to our obligation as recreational anglers to put our salmon first.

Great.(sarcasm) The courts are making our scientific decisions. Scary stuff. For a guy who swears by science you sure are relying entirely on a different system(the courts) to achieve your desires. The science isn't good enough so off to court. I would not be proud of that.

 

[agentaqua]

Predictably I know and acknowledge something that FF boosters would rather ignore... AND...
Yes, I wouldn't be proud of how industry has either corrupted and/or dictated our regulatory regime so badly that DFO lost yet again in court when taken to task wrt their fiduciary duty to the public. Kinda embarrassing and frustrating isn't it?

 

[GLG]

Great.(sarcasm) The courts are making our scientific decisions. Scary stuff. For a guy who swears by science you sure are relying entirely on a different system(the courts) to achieve your desires. The science isn't good enough so off to court. I would not be proud of that.

Again you got this backwards as the science was paramount in the first court decision. Your side could not produce a scrap of evidence that suggested otherwise.
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2015/2015fc575/2015fc575.html#_Piscine_reovirus_(PRV)

 

[wildmanyeah]

Face facts Fishmyster wild salmon smolts do better then hatchery smolts. Hatchery smolts are feed every day by staff so they are not influenced by a lack of bugs in the water. Until you can prove otherwise with peer reviewed science papers then I will go with what the science says.

Coho marine survival over time. Blue represents wild stocks.

https://marinesurvivalproject.com/w...nd-hatchery-coho-salmon-in-the-Salish-Sea.pdf

The netpen chinook raised at the Cap are returning 4 to 1 to normal hatchery releases. They found that feeding chum for a short period before they left greatly increased survival to for hatchery releases. Clearly food in the early stages of life does make a difference.

However, the wild smolts do have better survival probably do to the nature selection that occurs in freshwater, The ones that can find food the fastest and get away from predators survive. so once in the ocean they will should outperform hatchery fish.

 

[Fishmyster]

Face facts Fishmyster wild salmon smolts do better then hatchery smolts. Hatchery smolts are feed every day by staff so they are not influenced by a lack of bugs in the water. Until you can prove otherwise with peer reviewed science papers then I will go with what the science says.

Coho marine survival over time. Blue represents wild stocks.

https://marinesurvivalproject.com/w...nd-hatchery-coho-salmon-in-the-Salish-Sea.pdf

That is only a book smart answer. Hatchery fish are hand fed then let out into the wild where the predators have a feast on the domesticated juveniles. If you and the others ever pull your head out of your graphs you could maybe learn something new.

 

[Fishmyster]

GLG you just keep staring at the graphs and I will keep looking farther up the food chain to see what has killed the ecology.

 

[agentaqua]

FM is right, GLG - who needs that ed-U-ma-cation, anyways? All science has done is allow us to communicate over the web, produce the trucks we drive and get us to the moon - and that was a Disney movie, anyways.

 

[Fishmyster]

FM is right, GLG - who needs that ed-U-ma-cation, anyways? All science has done is allow us to communicate over the web, produce the trucks we drive and get us to the moon - and that was a Disney movie, anyways.
View attachment 43501 View attachment 43502

Oh ya!
I challenge you to a snow ball fight!! Name the place and ill take you all on!!! lol

 

[browningmirage]

GLG you just keep staring at the graphs and I will keep looking farther up the food chain to see what has killed the ecology.

You should.

But you should fight just as hard to understand marine, because without both environments functioning correctly, there is no future.

We need to identify stressors, the mechanisms of those stressors, and magnitudes.

It's like Matt Damon on the Martian said...paraphrasing here: if you get bogged down in the totality of the problem, you will never move forward. You need to take the problem and break it down into the smaller problems that are fixable.

We cant easily reverse climate change at this juncture. We can deal with additional stressors, be it temperature, disease, water quality, etc. FM, you are fully right that water quality is a potential problem. Just as others are fully right that disease (including that vectored or amplified by fish farms) is a potential problem.

I think where the disagreement arises is the perception of magnitude. Belittling others because they put more stock in different mechanisms doesnt make you right, or better...it just points to tunnel vision.

Especially when fisheries data is so noisy. Definitive answers are a pipe dream

 

[agentaqua]

bottlenecks - in other words...

 

[browningmirage]

bottlenecks - in other words...

Haha but in many many many more words

 

[Fishmyster]

You should.

But you should fight just as hard to understand marine, because without both environments functioning correctly, there is no future.

We need to identify stressors, the mechanisms of those stressors, and magnitudes.

It's like Matt Damon on the Martian said...paraphrasing here: if you get bogged down in the totality of the problem, you will never move forward. You need to take the problem and break it down into the smaller problems that are fixable.

We cant easily reverse climate change at this juncture. We can deal with additional stressors, be it temperature, disease, water quality, etc. FM, you are fully right that water quality is a potential problem. Just as others are fully right that disease (including that vectored or amplified by fish farms) is a potential problem.

I think where the disagreement arises is the perception of magnitude. Belittling others because they put more stock in different mechanisms doesnt make you right, or better...it just points to tunnel vision.

Especially when fisheries data is so noisy. Definitive answers are a pipe dream

FW algae change, lack of decomposition, loss of biodiversity and loss of insect biomass. It is not just a potential problem but definitive. Have a look at the videos. It is as real of a problem as the sun is hot or fish need food to grow. PVR is a potential problem.

Belittling comes from frustration when people tell me that I don't know what I'm talking about yet refuse to acknowledge the supporting information I bring forward. I don't consider myself right or better but I do refuse to just accept the notion that FW issues are not worth investigating. Call it tunnel vision. I'm not offended from being belittled. I know that some day there will be interest in the information I can bring to the table for discussion of salmon productivity.

 

[Birdsnest]

Predictably I know and acknowledge something that FF boosters would rather ignore... AND...
Yes, I wouldn't be proud of how industry has either corrupted and/or dictated our regulatory regime so badly that DFO lost yet again in court when taken to task wrt their fiduciary duty to the public. Kinda embarrassing and frustrating isn't it?

More conspiracy theories.

 

[Birdsnest]

Again you got this backwards as the science was paramount in the first court decision. Your side could not produce a scrap of evidence that suggested otherwise.
https://www.canlii.org/en/ca/fct/doc/2015/2015fc575/2015fc575.html#_Piscine_reovirus_(PRV)

I understand your intent was to make it look like the industry currently has nothing against this however if you read your attachment you will quickly realize the only information available at the time was the relations ship of PRV in terms of atlantic salmon both farmed and wild mostly derived from Norway. We do not have this relationship here on the west coast. The decision was only based on PRV and atlantics and there was no available information that described pacific salmon species and their relationship with PRV.
I think the agent, with his/her sleight of hand slaging, calls this "collective amnesia" where you have forgotten to include or acknowledge all the recent work done on prv and its relationship with pacific salmon. You are right in saying my side could not provide evidence(at that time)however you are incorrect where you imply that I have it backwards for there was no science available at the time. And the science that is available now at most only says maybe and the only with one species of pacific salmon, chinook which, is important.

So are you going to be honest and post the study by garver in 2016 that show minimal effects of PRV on pacifics or do I have to do it again for you. You seem to know everything. Do you know when you are being dishonest and misleading?

 

[agentaqua]

I understand your intent was to make it look like the industry currently has nothing against this however if you read your attachment you will quickly realize the only information available at the time was the relations ship of PRV in terms of atlantic salmon both farmed and wild mostly derived from Norway. We do not have this relationship here on the west coast.
...

Really?? Speaking of misleading - see:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0171471
http://www.facetsjournal.com/doi/10.1139/facets-2018-0008

 

[agentaqua]

The Virus that Makes DFO Put Its Head in the Sand
https://thetyee.ca/Analysis/2019/02/14/Virus-DFO-Head-Sand/