Dependent upon presumed scale of potential impacts......You nailed it. That's the problem with those studies and how predictions of extinction by statisticians like Krkosek are suspect at best. Feel free to post these specific papers that outline how we can quantify this mortality. I will look at them. However, many of these papers were presented as evidence during Cohen. We know the findings and recommendations. As far as I know there was no quantitative method of determining how many wild salmon were killed by sea lice. Just like we don't know how many wild salmon are killed by Victoria sewage. It's extremely difficult to obtain dead wild salmon samples. It's equally difficult to determine how and why a fish has died in the wild because not all pathogens cause immediate mortality. Impacts may be more chronic in nature where it's a combination of factors that cause mortality. Some wild salmon could already be in a compromised condition already - need to account for that and that's one of the problems with some past studies. Those are just some of the challenges faced by researchers like Miller or the team of other UBC researchers.
Sea Lice and Fish Farms
- Thread starter fogged in
- Start date
You are not a scientist....Thanks for your honesty. I believe before you go out on a limb on this and bash DFO or whoever that you take the time to think that perhaps this is not just a straightforward answer. Maybe just maybe there are some real questions posed on this as well as some equally daunting challenges that researchers even in DFO are taking seriously. Never said "impossible" but we should be living in the reality of the moment.
That same rationale can be extended to other industries that work in and around water. Do they all provide rough estimates of how many wild salmon they kill?
Thanks for the rational and respectful post, Shuswap.
It would be quite a bit of work to repost all the peer-reviewed and grey literature on all of the potential and realized impacts from the open net-cage technology. There are literally hundreds of articles out there.
Instead, I encourage those interested to do their own investigation - including doing a search on these forums where many posters besides myself (e.g. WitW, GLG, Englishman, and many others) - as well as googling for a specific impact using key search words like "sea lice", "aquaculture", "fish disease" - among others.
There are assumptions inherent in all modelling - and largely - those assumptions are valid - when using a certain set of impacting and interacting variables as stated in the modelling methodologies. We are often blindly oblivious of how dependent we have become on modelling in our lives - whether it be engineering models that design and operate most of our infrastructure, weather models, or many other examples.
Some of the variables that Krkosek used in his modelling were later changed (thankfully) and that later changed his dated predictions. I agree (with hindsight available today) that it would have been better precaution for Krkosek to not leave himself open for the inevitable critique of his future prediction of extinction for when those impacting and interacting variables changed.
That does not mean that there is no utility in using models - nor that open net-cage operations have no impact on wild stocks.
Yes - there are of course many interacting impacts of various scopes wrt wild salmon populations and stock trajectories - and as I have stated numerous times on these forums - that does not mean we ignore our responsibilities for our future generations by walking away from our stewardship duties. There are some impacts that we can easily influence (e.g. closed verses open containment) - while others can be more challenging (e.g. climate change).
We can and should do a better job wrt protecting wild stocks from open net-pen operations - and that includes applying defensible, science-based siting criteria and appropriate environmental risk assessment while transitioning to closed containment wrt impacts from the open net-cage industry.
Above all - we need open and transparent data and info to base decisions on - something that has been lacking from the open net-cage industry due to it's incestuous relationship with the regulators - which is unfortunately not unique to only the open net-cage industry.
While there are other impacts to wild stocks - that does not mean we should ignore impacts from the open net-cage industry. That suggestion is - to me - is irresponsible, unprofessional and unacceptable.
Last edited:
Gear'n'beer!
Well-Known Member
Hey Boner.....for a guy who doesn't work in "aquaculture" you sure seem to know a pile about it.....
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
Bottom line, if there is a need or desire for DFO to collect the data they can, IF they wanted to - they for mostly political reasons don't want to.
Last edited:
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
Just because FF or other industries that impact and/or kill salmon don't collect data is not a good reason for them to not to! If we as a society are serious about protecting and promoting more wild salmon, then it just makes good sense and wise management that all the industries that negatively impact salmon start collecting such data. We all know that DFO does this for the commercial and recreational fishing sectors.
OldBlackDog
Well-Known Member
For Immediate Release – Sept. 26, 2017
Environment and Climate Change Canada Reluctant to Enforce Regulations against Aquaculture Operators
http://www.conservationcouncil.ca/e...ce-regulations-against-aquaculture-operators/
Environment and Climate Change Canada Reluctant to Enforce Regulations against Aquaculture Operators
http://www.conservationcouncil.ca/e...ce-regulations-against-aquaculture-operators/
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
Yet another example of how our prov. and fed govt's are in a improper, immoral and sometimes illegal, sympathetic supportive relationship with the feedlot salmon farming industry. Disgusting and disturbing IMHO! Be interesting to see how the FF supporters will try to explain or deflect this away?
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
And the FF supporters silence on this is deafening...!
So your asking the government what? To take action on fish farms in the Atlantic ocean because some retire person has "April 25, 2017 that they had a reasonable belief that the companies he identified were violating the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999"
Reasonable belief?
Reasonable belief?
You do know that fish waste and food pass through is biodegradable. It mainly phosphor and nitrate with alittle carbon. To prevent top loading on this coastline they placed farms near areas that are protected and offer some current for dispersal of waste. No recordable information a 100m from site.
Curious as to how much top loading was present at the site in question
Curious as to how much top loading was present at the site in question
as far as I am concerned - this all started a few years back - as sea lice became ever more resistant to slice - the feed additive. The industry was desperate for alternatives - and external sea lice treatments (e.g. Avermectins like Emamectin Benzoate, or cypermethrins or deltamethrins) looked promising. Since they couldn't directly get approval for the release of a known "deleterious substance" - they got "emergency approval" through a vet's approval to use these "unapproved" products.
Then Cooke aquaculture (the same ones that allowed the latest large release of farmed salmon in Washington State) back East ended-up killing off large numbers of lobsters in a lobster pound - and lied about it and hid evidence. They got found out and were headed for court - but avoided it: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...the-hook-for-500k-for-pesticide-use-1.1317105
After that - EC became more aware and resistant to the issue of sea lice baths used chemotheraputants. That didn't work for the industry - so they went crying to DFO who rolled out the Aquaculture Activities Regulations which they published in the Canada Gazette after cutting and pasting from the industry meeting notes: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2015-177/
This allowed fish-farm operators to deposit deleterious substances without consideration of site‐specific conditions and cumulative environmental effects, and took the regulation of the aquaculture industry away from EC.
We are finally seeing the fall-out from those backroom deals. I think the term incestuous to describe the relationship between the Aquaculture Branch of DFO, and the industry is too forgiving a term...
Then Cooke aquaculture (the same ones that allowed the latest large release of farmed salmon in Washington State) back East ended-up killing off large numbers of lobsters in a lobster pound - and lied about it and hid evidence. They got found out and were headed for court - but avoided it: http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...the-hook-for-500k-for-pesticide-use-1.1317105
After that - EC became more aware and resistant to the issue of sea lice baths used chemotheraputants. That didn't work for the industry - so they went crying to DFO who rolled out the Aquaculture Activities Regulations which they published in the Canada Gazette after cutting and pasting from the industry meeting notes: http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/regulations/SOR-2015-177/
This allowed fish-farm operators to deposit deleterious substances without consideration of site‐specific conditions and cumulative environmental effects, and took the regulation of the aquaculture industry away from EC.
We are finally seeing the fall-out from those backroom deals. I think the term incestuous to describe the relationship between the Aquaculture Branch of DFO, and the industry is too forgiving a term...
Last edited:
wayne marwood
Crew Member
If they went under water and seen what us going on down there they might do somrthing,but I think they are getting hush money,
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
Thanks for shedding some needed light on some of the backroom deals that the prov and fed govt's allow to take place to prop up this environmentally harmful industry. More power to those hard working citizens and groups that expose the govt. supported corruption and cover up that is associated with this industry!
Wayne do you have a picture of what's going on?
Wonder what the area looked like after the pesticide outlined here : http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/new-b...the-hook-for-500k-for-pesticide-use-1.1317105 was used. I don't expect the prawns would have done any better than all the hundreds of lobsters that were killed off. Pretty disgusting what is happening.
Similar threads
