Salmon farms harming wild salmon 60 minutes - cbs

[ClayoquotKid]

If we are lucky - the Atlantic population(s) died-out since 1999. That doesn't mean that we have adequate surveys enough to say either way at this time.

It also doesn't mean that there are no escapees that may enter streams adjacent to the fish farming industry. My concern is less do do with genetic pollution - which is the problem in the Atlantic - but rather with fish disease transfer. ESPECIALLY ISA, PRV and other disease vectors.

Disease transfer?

From vaccinated and screened farmed fish which have escaped and were healthy enough to travel up into adjacent freshwater habitat?

FUD.

 

[ClayoquotKid]

Actually - I already gave you the references for this and the details. They weren't "imaginary" fish CK - maybe in your mind - but look back to where I quoted:

In the Can. J. Fish. Aquat. Sci. 58: 197–207 (2001) study - Volpe states: "In August 1998, the first naturally reproduced Atlantic salmon were captured in the Tsitika River on the northeast coast of Vancouver Island (Volpe et al. 2000). The 12 fish sampled represent the first documented evidence of successful feral spawnings (2 year-classes captured) of aquaculture-escaped Atlantic salmon in British Columbia."

Look back a few more posts and you even give the "4 S0, and 8 S1 Atlantics (by scale growth observation)" data.

Do you always contradict yourself CK?

One one hand you are claiming the fish are only "imaginary", and the next you are letting us know what fish Volpe reported.

Then you are stating If John Vople actually had evidence of a feral population of escaped Atlantic salmon living in a BC river you were quite sure he would have made it his life's work to show it.

So then you deny knowledge of that peer-reviewed report - the one you just reported numbers from.

I think you have a major credibility problem. It'd be nice if you stopped fibbing.

Are you being purposely dense here, or do you not understand that there is a difference between the fish that Volpe found and the ones he is proposing exist using his models?

 

[agentaqua]

Agent, on one hand your saying that atlantics are invading and establishing populations and then you carry on to say that the self reporting cant be trusted. This suggest that you believe that far far more atlantics escaped in bc giving them far far more opportunity to establish here than what is reported yet there are no established populations.
And don't forget all the previous sport fishing introductions over the last 90 years or so. http://msc.khamiahosting.com/sites/default/files/Timeline of Atlantic salmon in Pacific.pdf

I just dont think you got a pot to **** in on this one.

FUD away as I know you will. FUD away.

Actually it wasn't me saying that. I am merely quoting the available science as reported. And you can't really say for sure that there are "NO" established populations. If we are lucky (as I did state) the population(s) reported on in 1999 died out - maybe due to lack of numbers or strengthened returns of competing steelhead - or for whatever reason.

If you look back a few posts you will see what I consider to be the problem with escapees (again);

1/ self-reporting and lack of verification processes,
2/ potential disease transfer, and
3/ lack of transparency by DFO.

 

[agentaqua]

Are you being purposely dense here, or do you not understand that there is a difference between the fish that Volpe found and the ones he is proposing exist using his models?

First - I think we need to acknowledge that he did find both 1 year old and 2 year old Atlantic juveniles in 1997-1999 in the watersheds previously mentioned

Secondly I think we need to zero in on the issues I just raised above:
1/ self-reporting and lack of verification processes,
2/ potential disease transfer, and
3/ lack of transparency by DFO.

Then: we can have a discussion as to any models limitations and restrictions. You may feel that these points above should be glossed over CK - but they are potentially important points.

Your assertion that fish farm fish cannot give diseases back'n'forth to wild stocks because they were inoculated against a few diseases really demonstrates your lack of understanding of these issues. If your misunderstanding were true - why do farm fish get ISA, IHN, IPN, PRV, BKD, VHS, and Pancreatic Disease then?

Are you really that uninformed - or are you hoping we are?

 

[ClayoquotKid]

First - I think we need to acknowledge that he did find both 1 year old and 2 year old Atlantic juveniles in 1997-1999 in the watersheds previously mentioned

Secondly I think we need to zero in on the issues I just raised above:
1/ self-reporting and lack of verification processes,
2/ potential disease transfer, and
3/ lack of transparency by DFO.

Then: we can have a discussion as to any models limitations and restrictions. You may feel that these points above should be glossed over CK - but they are potentially important points.

Your assertion that fish farm fish cannot give diseases back'n'forth to wild stocks because they were inoculated against a few diseases really demonstrates your lack of understanding of these issues. If your misunderstanding were true - why do farm fish get ISA, IHN, IPN, PRV, BKD, VHS, and Pancreatic Disease then?

Are you really that uninformed - or are you hoping we are?

Actually, you don't get to dictate what or when anything is talked about on here.

The only point that matters IMHO - is that until people start finding spawning adult pairs of Atlantic salmon in BC rivers (which is statistically very, very unlikely, and has apparently also not occurred in Chile, New Zealand, or Australia - or actually anywhere else in the world outside of their natural range they have tried to stock them on purpose...), Volpe's 15 year old paper hypothesizing a feral population based on the presence or absence of a "Winter Check" seen on the scales of 12 juvenile Atlantics is simply a theory based on questionable evidence.

Once again you seem unable to acknowledge the 90% and are myopically focused on the 10% containing the uncertainty and questions which align with your world-view.

 

[agentaqua]

The fact that you don't recognize that scale analysis has been used for many decades on fish, and winter checks are the determination between years classes on temperate fishes just adds confirmation to my belief that we are all better off if stay on your net-pen and let people who know fisheries work speak for that work. People who know something about the topic they are speaking about.

There is a quote attributed to both Abraham Lincoln and Mark Twain that goes: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." It seems appropriate in this situation

I figured you'd want to run away from the discussion on disease transfer, CK.

More on your uninformed assertion/inference that simply because an escaped farm fish was vaccinated and now considered in your eyes "healthy" and thereby incapable of spreading disease into wild stocks:

Farmed fish are inoculated against only a small number of the many potential disease vectors, and only a small number of strains of each targeted disease vector. For example – there is no current inoculation against the non-pathogenic variant ISAV HPR0.

IPN and ISA may still cause considerable losses even in vaccinated fish

inactivated whole virus vaccines do not give sterile immunity, and vaccinated fish may become virus carriers.

Where there are large numbers of fish interacting in close quarters - like on fish farms or on the spawning grounds - disease transfer is most likely to happen - its got to do with host densities and concentration of infective agents - and stress.

when in high stocking densities, when spawning or when adjusting to changes in salinity - fish get stressed and latent diseases get turned on.

so tell us again CK - why do vaccinated farm fish get ISA, IHN, IPN, PRV, BKD, VHS, and Pancreatic Disease then?

ya I know - you wish to avoid this topic and paste "FUD" as your defense.

 

[ClayoquotKid]

The fact that you don't recognize that scale analysis has been used for many decades on fish, and winter checks are the determination between years classes on temperate fishes just adds confirmation to my belief that we are all better off if stay on your net-pen and let people who know fisheries work speak for that work. People who know something about the topic they are speaking about.

There is a quote attributed to both Abraham Lincoln and Mark Twain that goes: "Better to remain silent and be thought a fool than to speak out and remove all doubt." It seems appropriate in this situation

I figured you'd want to run away from the discussion on disease transfer, CK.

More on your uninformed assertion/inference that simply because an escaped farm fish was vaccinated and now considered in your eyes "healthy" and thereby incapable of spreading disease into wild stocks:

Farmed fish are inoculated against only a small number of the many potential disease vectors, and only a small number of strains of each targeted disease vector. For example – there is no current inoculation against the non-pathogenic variant ISAV HPR0.

IPN and ISA may still cause considerable losses even in vaccinated fish

inactivated whole virus vaccines do not give sterile immunity, and vaccinated fish may become virus carriers.

Where there are large numbers of fish interacting in close quarters - like on fish farms or on the spawning grounds - disease transfer is most likely to happen - its got to do with host densities and concentration of infective agents - and stress.

when in high stocking densities, when spawning or when adjusting to changes in salinity - fish get stressed and latent diseases get turned on.

so tell us again CK - why do vaccinated farm fish get ISA, IHN, IPN, PRV, BKD, VHS, and Pancreatic Disease then?

ya I know - you wish to avoid this topic and paste "FUD" as your defense.

I am well aware of the practice of scale analysis for ageing fish - just pointing out that using that to try and show the first documented case of a feral Atlantic population is not as bomb-proof as you may think.

Although possibly not as distinct, farmed fish will have winter checks due to slower growth in colder water, periods of interrupted feeding, or stress events like - stocking in a sea pen?

I'm talking about BC here, so your ISA chatter really is just that.

You don't seem to be able to understand that a the time of stocking, with smolts that have been monitored and continually assessed by vets, the farm site is probably the one of the most healthy components of the ocean.

Once the big bad world hits those fish the story can change, but the bacteria and virus' come from natural sources.

The possibility of a fish leaving a pen and entering a river with something that wasn't already present is spectacularly small, and your persistent focus on these "coulds" really shows how willing you are to ignore the 90% of evidence that points the other way - given your elevated, if not hyperactive sense of risk perception, and near fanatical interpretation of the Precautionary Principle.

You, and others, may have concerns - but there are still many more who have also looked at the same information and come to different conclusions about it.

While you roll the Precautionary Principle around like prayer beads, on the extreme end of it all, the rest of the world is able to move forward with the knowledge that there may be unknowns and risks, but those are balanced by management and the consideration of observations seen.

 

[agentaqua]

I am well aware of the practice of scale analysis for ageing fish - just pointing out that using that to try and show the first documented case of a feral Atlantic population is not as bomb-proof as you may think.

you are "WELL AWARE" of scale analysis? REALLY?? Well, why then did you post:

...He found some juvenile fish (they were real), he looked at their scales and hypothesised that they were from 2 year classes based on an assumption that only wild fish would have a "winter check" (speculative) ...

...Volpe's 15 year old paper hypothesizing a feral population based on the presence or absence of a "Winter Check" seen on the scales of 12 juvenile Atlantics is simply a theory based on questionable evidence...

Seems you do not understand scale analysis at all to me. Otherwise you wouldn't be trying to discredit the long-accepted and verified methodology of scale analysis - claiming it was "speculative or "simply a theory". ALL fisheries management projections are based on determination of year classes within coho, chinook and sockeye stocks - particularly. The NORTH PACIFIC ANADROMOUS FISH COMMISSION - you know- the bunch that you recently posted a web link to in "defense" of your assumption that there were no Atlantics in Pacific drainages - uses this methodology all the time, as well as DFO and Universities and other researchers. It is a well accepted methodology - except when you don't like the findings apparently.

Although possibly not as distinct, farmed fish will have winter checks due to slower growth in colder water, periods of interrupted feeding, or stress events like - stocking in a sea pen?

ya - so? Is this your "defense" of not believing in scale analysis? Comparing the fact that farmed fish - who get feed continuously - don't show the winter checks as reliably? WOW! CK. You really are demonstrating your ignorance here again. The reason temperate fishes have winter check marks in the annulli is due to reduced feeding opportunities and a associated reduction in growth. They don't get fed fish food like net-cage fish. Why would you then use farm fish as a "defense" against your bias against Volpes work when you should know the dynamics of fish growth in the wild. Either you really don't know wild stocks - or you are again hoping we don't. You are really, really scraping for a way to discredit Volpe's work and failing miserably.

You don't seem to be able to understand that a the time of stocking, with smolts that have been monitored and continually assessed by vets, the farm site is probably the one of the most healthy components of the ocean.

Actually you don't seem to understand I really do understand that most smolts (except from the batches of eggs that circumvented the guidelines when under pressure from the BCSFA) come from certified hatcheries. The fact that they can and do get diseases and parasites from the wild stocks proves the ineffectiveness of that technology in mitigating wild-cultured stock interactions. That is my issue with that technology. You think that transfer only happens one-way? RIGHT!!! It is the magnification and subsequent release of parasites and disease vectors back onto the early life history stages (outmigrating wild salmon smolts) that is the concern.

The possibility of a fish leaving a pen and entering a river with something that wasn't already present is spectacularly small

Really!! "spectacularly small"?? Maybe you could enlighten us on this forum CK with your vast knowledge or data. What proof do you have for this assertion?

 

[Dave]

Recent sasquatch sitings in Squamish ….. one
Recent feral Atlantic sitings in BC rivers…. none

 

[agentaqua]

retired DFO personnel who defend open net-cages on Sportsfishing Forum - one.

 

[agentaqua]

The possibility of a fish leaving a pen and entering a river with something that wasn't already present is spectacularly small

Since I know CK can't defend this claim - here's some actual science and past experience with the open net-cage industry to repudiate his unsupported statement:

http://www.eurocbc.org/ff_report_disease.pdf
In October, 1999, biologists with the Atlantic Salmon Federation discovered wild Atlantic salmon infected with the ISA virus in New Brunswick’s Megaguadavic River (ASF 1999). This was the first documentation of wild salmon containing this deadly virus. The biologists also discovered escaped farmed salmon with ISA in the river. The Megaguadavic River is located near the centre of New Brunswick’s aquaculture industry in the Bay of Fundy.

At about 0.5 mm in length, Gyrodactylus salaris is a flatworm parasite that spends its entire life cycle on the host’s skin, and occasionally on the eyes and gills (Windsor et al. 1995). The parasite was first discovered on a fresh water salmon farm in northern Sweden in the 1970’s. Although outbreaks of this disease would periodically occur in Sweden, the parasite could be treated with pesticides. In the mid- 1970’s, the salmon farming industry in Norway imported live Atlantic salmon smolts from Sweden. Since G. salaris is a fresh water parasite, it dies when placed in salt water. But not all of the imported salmon smolts went to salmon sea cages. Some were taken to a freshwater hatchery used to breed salmon smolts for farming. In 1975, a G. salaris outbreak in the hatchery led to high salmon mortality. Within a month, the disease was found in wild salmon in a river next to where the initially affected hatchery was located (Johnsen et al. 1991). By the end of 1980, 20 rivers were infected resulting in catastrophic wild salmon mortalities. In was estimated that in 1984 alone, G. salaris had resulted in a loss of 250 – 500 tonnes to the wild salmon fishery (Johnsen et al. 1986).

To date, 40 Norwegian rivers have been infected by G. salaris. In many of these rivers, wild Atlantic salmon have been driven to the point of extinction. In an attempt to contain the disaster, the Norwegian government has ordered that many rivers be treated with rotenone. This powerful poison is being used to kill most life in the rivers, and then efforts will be made at restocking them. Whether the poison will remove all of the Gyrodactylus salaris in the rivers remains to be seen.

http://bioscience.oxfordjournals.org/content/55/5/427.full
Furunculosis, caused by the bacterium Aeromonas salmonicida, was first described in brown trout culture in Germany in 1894, and in North America in 1902. Opinions differ on its geographical origin, but not on the potential of its spread through translocated and cultured fish. Outbreaks can occur several hundred kilometers from the last known outbreak, often associated with known translocation of fish. In 1985, the disease was introduced to Norwegian fish farms by transport of smolts from Scotland. The disease spread rapidly from the first few infected farms to reach 550 fish farms (70% of the total) by the end of 1992. In 1988–1989, more than 250,000 escaped farm salmon were from farms infected with furunculosis. These fish were then found among spawning salmon (both farm escapees and wild fish) the following autumn. By 1992, furunculosis had been registered in 74 Norwegian rivers. In four rivers, the disease reached epidemic proportions. The rapid spread of furunculosis after the development of Norwegian marine aquaculture contrasts with the limited spread from a natural population that was infected in the late 1960s without showing evidence of further transmission. Vaccination programs and better husbandry in the aquaculture industry seem to have eliminated the furunculosis problem in recent years.

 

[Dave]

Agent, although I do not believe it will ever happen, I suggested in another post a population of wild Atlantic’s spawning in BC rivers would be welcomed by anglers. You seemed shocked but had no real rebuttal. I also asked your opinion on the resident and obviously self-sustaining Brown trout population in the Cowichan River, another introduced species. Is this acceptable in your opinion? Should these fish be culled?

 

[rjs]

I suggested in another post a population of wild Atlantic’s spawning in BC rivers would be welcomed by anglers.

not by me ! anyone else would want to welcome them besides Dave ?

 

[LowTide]

There is no offshore recreational fishery for Atlantics on the East Coast and they are very rarely caught in Lake Ontario where they are also native. They just don't take a lure readily. I don't think giving up precious stream resources to Atlantic fry over native species is a good plan.

 

[agentaqua]

I never thought that was a serious question Dave - especially given your background. I just considered that you were sh*t disturbing. I think most posters on this forum are aware of the negative and long-lasting consequences of unintended (and sometimes planned) invasive species and outplants. It really doesn't require an answer or debate, although the history and the magnitude of the effects is interesting. The history is well known.

Your own department is so concerned with these issues - There is a transplant committee in DFO that oversees egg imports, and there is Aquatic Invasive Species Regulations. Some web links below.
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/enviro/ais-eae/code/app-ann-1-eng.htm
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/acts-lois/rules-reglements/rule-reglement01-eng.htm
http://isdm-gdsi.gc.ca/ais-eae/regulatory-eng.asp
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/publications/article/2011/01-05-11-eng.html
www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/science/enviro/ais-eae/index-eng.htm

 

[Dave]

You still have not answered my questions regarding Brown trout in the Cowichan, which could just as easily have been Atlantic's had the transplants taken when millions were introduced to Pacific watersheds. Are they OK in your opinion? Seems to me they are invaluable, canaries in the cave, so to speak as they are as susceptible to ISA as Atlantic's.
Would really like to see a disease survey done on Browns ... or has that been done?

 

[agentaqua]

i agree on the ISA/viral/disease survey for all resident salmonids - something which CFIA refuses to do. I think they are afraid of finding out how bad it really is. Unless ISA is vertically-transmitted - one plausible way that Pacific salmon could get ISA before they leave a watershed (e.g. Oweekeno and Cultus Lakes sockeye smolts) is through contact with resident fish stocks, esp. steelhead/rainbows which have been proven to be able to be carriers of ISA. The other plausible option is between years classes of either coho or sockeyes within the freshwater. Maybe both options are viable and concurrent.

On browns verses Atlantics - don't forget the fact that juvie Atlantics have large pectoral fins that they use to anchor themselves in faster water - in sections that steelhead fry like in Pacific watersheds. Browns - to my limited understanding - are less attracted to faster water, and more likely would compete with cutties and rainbows - or that's what I would expect. Maybe someone on here with more experience with brown trout could jump in here.

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0165783602001601

In any event Dave - it's a weak argument for allowing escapees from fish farms to happen.

 

[agentaqua]

The possibility of a fish leaving a pen and entering a river with something that wasn't already present is spectacularly small

Disease interaction and pathogens exchange between wild and farmed fish populations with special reference to Norway
L.-H. Johansen a,⁎, I. Jensen a, H. Mikkelsen a, P.-A. Bjørn b,1, P.A. Jansen c, Ø. Bergh d,e
a Nofima, Pb 6122, N-9291 Tromsø, Norway
b Institute of Marine Research, PO Box 6404, N-9294 Tromsø, Norway
c National Veterinary Institute PO Box 750 Sentrum, N-0106 Oslo, Norway
d Institute of Marine Research, PO Box 1870 Nordnes, N-5817 Bergen, Norway
e University of Bergen, Department of Biology, PO Box 7803, N-5020 Bergen, Norway
Aquaculture 315 (2011) 167–186
⁎ Corresponding author. Tel.: +47 77629204.
E-mail address: lill-heidi.johansen@nofima.no (L.-H. Johansen).
1 Present address.

0044-8486/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.aquaculture.2011.02.014

On ISA p.169:"Out of 8 Atlantic salmon positive for IPNV in 2008, 7 were escaped farmed fish (based on scale analysis tests). In 2009 IPNV was isolated from two wild Atlantic salmon".

"There is increasing evidence that IPNV may be transferred from farmed to wild fish through contact with discharges and products from IPNV-contaminated farms (Bucke et al., 1979; Hastein and Lindstad, 1991;McAllister and Bebak, 1997;McVicar et al., 1993; Mortensen, 1993; Sonstegard et al., 1972; Wallace et al., 2008)".

On VHS p.170: “The infection may persist sub-clinically in rainbow trout, and reservoirs of infection are cultured or wild fish that are covert carriers. Virulent virus is shed with urine and ovarian fluids (Skall et al., 2005), and once the virus is established in a farmed stock the disease becomes enzootic because of the latent carrier fish.”

“Genotyping of VHSV isolates from other clinical outbreaks in farmed turbot and rainbow trout in areas previously considered VHS free in Sweden and Finland indicates transfer of VHSV from wild to farmed fish (reviewed in Raynard et al., 2007; Skall et al., 2005). The most probable route of VHSV infection in farmed Atlantic salmon in North America was also through contact with wild fish (Raynard et al., 2007; Skall et al., 2005).”

On ISA p.171: “Based on phylogenetic analysis it is claimed that ISAV has been transferred from wild to farmed fish at least three times since the start of salmon farming in the north Atlantic (Nylund, 2007; Nylund et al.,2003). There is no documented evidence that ISAV has been transferred from farmed to wild fish (Nylund, 2007). In the area of Troms County that has had annual outbreaks, ISAV was detected in some of the escaped farmed salmon caught in rivers in the area (Johansen et al.,2009b). Thus, there may be a potential for transmission from farmed to wild fish, but it is not known whether this has actually caused any impact on the wild fish populations.).”

On Aeromonas salmonicida subsp. Salmonicida (AKA furunculosis) p.171: “Direct evidence for transmission from farmed to wild fish is scarce, but epizootological data suggest that such transmission takes place. Prior to the epizootic in Norway in 1991–1993 the disease was absent in Norway apart from one single outbreak several years before. The rapid spread to farms and natural water sources was associated with several factors such as escaped farmed fish and natural movement of wild fish in the sea (Johnsen and Jensen, 1994).”

On Flavobacterium psychrophilum(AKA bacterial cold water disease) p.171: “F. psychrophilum has been found in wild fish used as brood stock, wild salmon close to fish farm, in several wild fish species with no clinical signs of disease and in the water environment of fish farms that are infected (Raynard et al., 2007)..”

On Renibacterium salmoninarum (AKA causative agent of bacterial kidney disease (BKD) p.172: “As both horizontal and vertical transmission has been reported, there is a risk for transfer between wild and farmed species. Evidence for transfer has been found only in North American trout species in freshwater (Mitchum and Sherman, 1981; Mitchum et al., 1979).”

On Vibrio salmonicida (AKA cold water vibriosis) p.172: “Cold water vibriosis is transmitted horizontally and an epizootological study based on plasmid profiles suggested transmission from farmed Atlantic salmon to wild-caught Atlantic cod and vice versa..”

 

[seascene]

Seems from this article that killing small fish to raised large fish has catastrophic consequences:

Speaking at the Cambridge Science Festival on the 27th March 2014 CMO Prof Dame Sally Davies – England’s Chief Medical Officer - called for a reduction in the use of antibiotics on livestock. She said: “At the moment, if you eat a farmed salmon in America it has probably eaten its own weight in antibiotics.”

Therefore no one should be under any illusion that factory farmed fish is the answer. As this article shows over half of all fish eaten worldwide are now factory farmed - countries all over the world, from the poorest to the richest, partaking in this ugly industry. Fish farms, consequently, are ideal incubators for parasites and infectious diseases that are then spread to adjacent farms and to wild fish. These outbreaks are impossible to quarantine; mass escapes from fish farms and the normal flow of tides and currents spread diseases and parasites to other fish over very wide areas.

Antibiotics are administered to fish through medicated feed that is mixed at feed plants. Antibiotics enter the marine environment when some of the feed is not eaten and sinks to the seabed or is eliminated in fish excretion.
Three effects of the spread of antibiotics to the marine environment are
- Antibiotic resistance
- Spread to wild fish
- Retarded decomposition of organic material
Antibiotic resistance is becoming a real big issue:
Director-General of the World Health Organisation, Dr Margaret Chan, warned in 2011 of a “post-antibiotic era, in which many common infections will no longer have a cure and, once again, kill unabated.”
In March 2012 Dr Chan said: “Worldwide, the fact that greater quantities of antibiotics are used in healthy animals than in unhealthy humans is a cause for great concern.”
By 'healthy animals' this means in livestock farming. Frankly the only way to keep 'food' animals alive long enough from the dank, fetid crowded squalled intensive sheds or ponds to the slaughterhouse is by feeding them a diet of antibiotics.
One way or the other we are killing the oceans, the land and ourselves for a short sighted quick fix desire for animal flesh.