Fisheries Minister Jonathan Wilkinson ignores the courts decision on the threat the PRV virus!

cohochinook

Well-Known Member
Its's time Fisheries Minister Jonathan Wilkinson respected the courts decision on the threat the PRV virus poses to wild salmon and stop bearing his head in the sand! He continues to make very scary statements that he prioritizes farmed salmon ahead of wild salmon, which is mandate of his job as the head Minister for the Department of Fisheries and Oceans.

Comments like this one from a recent Georgia Straight interview, are clear indication of this behaviour. Minister Wilkinson was quoted as saying "In fact, what the court actually found is that DFO’s current policies set the threshold for “harm” to wild stocks too high and should be revisited. The court also said that upon revisiting this matter, “it is possible that the Minister will still conclude that it is appropriate to maintain the PRV Policy,” i.e. that it is not necessary to test for PRV."

Here's the full article and it show how out of touch Minister Wilkinson is on protecting wild salmon from the disease threat of PRV from farmed salmon:


https://www.straight.com/news/12146...tWxpFR-xWKj6aYFaWUZiFnzALAo2GRhHNfbjoX8EU9-6g
 
Thanks for that link AA. Its pretty depressing to watch the video and see how the monster is right in front of us in terms of why drastic declines in chinook and other salmon. Sick fish become food and never make it back to spawn. The Fish Farms need to be removed from the Ocean to stop killing our Wild Salmon. Minister Wilkinson has no touble shutting down the entire sportfishing industry onthe South Coast costing communities many millions of dollars in economic activity and thousands of jobs so should immediatley take the obvious step in shutting down these Fish Farms. Washington State does not allow PRV infected fish into the Ocean why should British Columbia not do the same. Check out Derby's thread on salmon sharks chowing down on 3 year old 20 plus pound salmon and think of how a PRV infected Chinook not on top of its game because its sick are making out
Satellite tags reveal what's eating older chinook salmon . Polluting, Virus and Disease infested Fish Farms need to go now for the endangered Southern Resident Killer Whales.
 
Glad to hear you wont be voting for the Liberals AA. You are right its funny that they think hatchery cause more harm to wild stocks then fish farms.

Hows that for a Liberal Wild salmon policy.


By Jonathan Wilkinson

We’re all familiar with the saying “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”. Beginning in the 1980s, policy makers began using these aphorisms to describe a “precautionary approach”.

It’s a concept at the heart of many applications of science and is something that will increasingly underpin how Canada will manage aquaculture.

It is the cornerstone of a suite of measures I announced in December to ensure Canada’s aquaculture industry is economically successful and environmentally sustainable.

Over 90 percent of the planet’s wild fish stocks are either fished to the maximum or overfished, yet demand for healthy sources of protein is increasing. Nearly half of fish consumed by humans now comes from aquaculture. It is clear the world needs aquaculture.

Over two-thirds of Canada’s farmed salmon production occurs in B.C.—the economic opportunities for coastal and Indigenous communities in B.C. are significant. However, concerns about the potential impacts have become divisive.

The good jobs and economic prosperity from aquaculture will only be realized if Canadians know that aquaculture is being undertaken in an environmentally sustainable manner.

It’s time to refresh the federal government’s approach to aquaculture by emphasizing more fulsome implementation of the precautionary approach. We must move forward in ways that address and don’t ignore areas of concern.

This means asking: if those with concerns about environmental impacts were eventually found to be correct, which concerns would be most damaging to the environment and what can we do to mitigate?

For example, one area of significant debate has been whether a specific virus could harm wild juvenile salmon near open-net farms along migratory pathways. There is disagreement on this topic. In the new federal framework, this means moving towards an area-based approach to managing aquaculture—an approach that takes into consideration environmental, social, and economic factors when identifying potential areas for new aquaculture development.

This is a discussion that has recently taken place here in B.C. regarding the Broughton Archipelago where the DFO will be working with B.C., industry and First Nations—listening to concerns and moving to an area-based approach.

Another element of our new approach is a focus on emerging technologies—including closed-containment. Recently, we announced an expedited technical and economic study. Results will inform technology development efforts and broader public policy considerations.

Over the past several years we have witnessed a sometimes acrimonious debate regarding aquaculture. It’s important that we move beyond this unproductive conversation—to better engage people of good intent in working to enhance sustainability.

To do this, all interested parties—including DFO—will need to reach out to those with other perspectives to engage in a more productive conversation. In this regard, DFO recently committed to creating a new position of “Science Advisor” and to creating an advisory committee to provide external perspective on aquaculture science priorities.

Having more constructive discussions will however require that we are forthright in our use of information. Too often over past years has one side or the other misconstrued information for the purpose of making their point.

For example, in an article that ran on this website (Georgia Straight) earlier this month, a noted environmental activist asserted that (if not appealed) a recent Federal Court decision regarding piscine orthoreovirus (PRV) requires, by law, that, as of June 4, smolts be tested for PRV before being transferred to open-net pens.

In fact, what the court actually found is that DFO’s current policies set the threshold for “harm” to wild stocks too high and should be revisited. The court also said that upon revisiting this matter, “it is possible that the Minister will still conclude that it is appropriate to maintain the PRV Policy,” i.e. that it is not necessary to test for PRV.

This is simply an example but one that I think highlights an important issue and underlines that we collectively need to be working to ensure we can have a thoughtful, forthright discussion founded on science and evidence.

I believe that folks on all sides of these issues are people of good intent—the vast majority of whom care deeply about the natural environment and about wild salmon. I do however believe we all need to be judicious in our use of facts and that we should all be striving to find ways to speak with each other in more effective ways.

I trust the vast majority of British Columbians do not think that we must choose between growing the economy and protecting the environment—I am one of them. That is why I firmly believe our new science-based approach to aquaculture will support a healthy ocean, good jobs, and economic prosperity on our coasts.

Jonathan Wilkinson (pictured) is the minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard.
 
60936825_2012490055544319_5439652062650433536_n.jpg

You are right, WMY. Trudeau is an egotistical fool, IMHO. BUT... Stevie Wonder and his band of Con-men were no better, neither.

They pulled outta PNCIMA because Enbridge had a temper-tanty, wouldn't implement the wild salmon policy nor Justice Cohen's recommendations; and gutted the Fisheries Act and other Acts/legislation protecting wild salmon using omnibus bills - just to name just but a few things.

It's not specifically due to any party - it's the system that corrupts - is the problem:

https://www.wakingtimes.com/2015/08...y-we-should-kick-rich-people-out-of-politics/
 
Last edited:
By Jonathan Wilkinson

We’re all familiar with the saying “an ounce of prevention is worth a pound of cure”. Beginning in the 1980s, policy makers began using these aphorisms to describe a “precautionary approach”.

It’s a concept at the heart of many applications of science and is something that will increasingly underpin how Canada will manage aquaculture.

The good jobs and economic prosperity from aquaculture will only be realized if Canadians know that aquaculture is being undertaken in an environmentally sustainable manner.

It’s time to refresh the federal government’s approach to aquaculture by emphasizing more fulsome implementation of the precautionary approach. We must move forward in ways that address and don’t ignore areas of concern.

This means asking: if those with concerns about environmental impacts were eventually found to be correct, which concerns would be most damaging to the environment and what can we do to mitigate?

Having more constructive discussions will however require that we are forthright in our use of information. Too often over past years has one side or the other misconstrued information for the purpose of making their point.

This is simply an example but one that I think highlights an important issue and underlines that we collectively need to be working to ensure we can have a thoughtful, forthright discussion founded on science and evidence.

Jonathan Wilkinson (pictured) is the minister of Fisheries, Oceans and the Canadian Coast Guard.

After reading the following blog post, I do believe more people than just politicians need replacement.
https://alexandramorton.typepad.com/
 
After reading the following blog post, I do believe more people than just politicians need replacement.
https://alexandramorton.typepad.com/
Wow. Just check out all those Sea Lice on the young Wild Salmon Smolts swimming past the Fish Farms. No Wild Salmon smolt can survive that. The Sea Lice outbreaks at the Fish Farms located right in the migratory path are worse than ever and killing all the young Wild Salmon Smolts that are swimming by. Where have all the Wild Salmon Gone? They are being slaughtered by Sea Lice. This insanity must stop or all the rest of the restoration efforts will be meaningless.
 
I agree Terrin. Reading that makes me very frustrated. All those that defended the farms for years really should shake their heads.
This is totally unacceptable. All the farms should be removed immediately. If the companies want to continue farming in BC, it needs to be closed containment and they need to prove that they are not impacting our wild fish. Imagine how quickly things would turn around if the gauntlet was removed....
 
sino. salmon returns where there are no fish farms are suffering equally. Look at the skeena for example. No salmon farms on those migration routs. I'm sorry. Salmon farms are not the smoking gun you claim.
 
Sorry Birdsnest. I know you are a Fish Farmer and you are simply defending your industry, filthy or not.
I did not claim that this was a smoking gun. My post simply stated that if we removed all the salmon farms from the open water, then logic would say the fish would have a better chance at survival. Look no further than Clayoquot, and the disaster that is happening there. No one can claim that the Fish Farms are not having significant impact on wild stocks there, not even you.
 
If salmon farms did not impact wild salmon stocks - then DFO would have no trouble using appropriate risk adverse and scientific siting criteria, and/or not risking the release of imported diseases on wild salmon - including not haven to be taken to court to get them to do their job DESPITE industry interference. Minister Wilkinson was ordered by the court to announce whether how he will screen farm salmon for PRV - and instead they are back in court using taxpayer $ to defend the industry.
 
The conclusion that I have come to after beating this horse to death with AA and he may or may not agree with me on this point is. Salmon are suffering a death by thousand cuts and salmon farms are one of those cuts.

We can all argue until were blue in the face about the size of the impact and our personal thoughts about how it should be handled.
 
Last edited:
The conclusion that I have come to after beating this horse to death with AA and he may or may not agree with me on this point is. Salmon are suffering a death by thousand cuts and salmon farms are one of those cuts...
I think we are in agreement, WMY
 
Sure I’m a fish farmer but I often find myself defending individual facts on these threads which bring to question what is the quality of the information being provided on these threads.
For example, in the above posts two things are absolutely false. First off rock fish can not have prv.
And again the agent is confusing the terms disease and virus. These are two different things which the agent still confuses on these threads and I would expect this individual to continue to do so.
This serves as a reminder that this forum is a social media platform where information provided is often misleading and incorrect. I don’t blame the @Admin for this for the subject matter is complex and they are limited to moderation for mud slinging and what seems to be inevitable name calling however when it comes to repeating misinformation as the agent does by replacing the term virus with disease I think it may be something the admin may address since this particular subject has pointed out repeatedly over the years yet the agent, who’s identity is top secret apparently, continues to broadcast this false information.

Diseased fish are not being put in the ocean. If a fish has prv it doesn’t mean it has a disease. Prv is not a disease causing agent. This is why it is called an orphan virus.

It’s interesting that when I post info I am usually posting opposition to individual comments or statement and the defence I see in return is that I am a defender of fish farms overall when really I rarely see defence addressing my individual comments. I should not have to be on here defending individual truths being put forth by the usual posters since they claim to be so highly informed yet seem more than willing to post plain lies and misinformation.
Note: the rockfish comment from wmy is likely an honest mistake since it is broadcast so often by activists.

I would ask the @Admin at the bare minimum to address this continuing effort by the agent to replace the term virus with disease for this individual has been corrected on this issue multiple times over the years on this basic use of these terms in this case by the agent is absolutely not true. It’s quite telling of this individual level of integrity on this topic.
 
Back
Top