Sea Lice and Fish Farms

Discussion in 'Conservation, Fishery Politics and Management.' started by fogged in, Oct 11, 2016.

  1. fogged in

    fogged in Well-Known Member

    There is no end of documentation on the harm Fish Farm Sea Lice have on wild salmon!
    This subject has been brought up several times and I have yet to see a response from those who regularly defend Fish Farms.
    Below are excerpts from a recent Bloomberg story
    I am hoping to hear from the Fish Farm supporters to enlighten us how Fish Farms are avoiding the problem in B .C..

    (Bloomberg) —

    Norway’s aquaculture industry spent 5 billion krone last year trying to eradicate sea lice, Aarskog said.
    Building traditional fish farms on the open water in Norway has become almost impossible because of state rules intended to curb outbreaks of sea lice, a parasite that can kill young fish
     
  2. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    If I have read it right, correct me if I'm wrong but farms in areas of high lice are asked to pack up and leave the area till counts are reduced. When fishing esperenza inlet, tahsis. The farms where empty for 2-3 years when asking the locals as to why? High lice counts.

    Sea lice is only a problem from what I've read on farms with Atlantic salmon I believe. I'm sure AA will copy and paste something in short order.

    If farms put such hardship on wild stock's then why is the entire coast having problems? Why is it that rivers and systems that do not have leases and never have had leases are suffering from the same problem?

    Example: Burrard inlet had two farms in it through the 80's and some of the 90's. They have been gone now for quit some time. Why is it that the Indian Seymour capilano and few smaller streams did not come back after the removal some 20 years ago. What will removal of all farms coast wide going to do for our future fish?
     
  3. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    The "problems" with sea lice depend upon the species and stage of the louse (Leps verses Caligus spp.; attached verses motile) - the numbers of lice per weight of the host fish - and the fishes ability to encapsulate the attached stages of the louse (host species and life stage).

    So - in other words - the smaller, outmigrating pink and chum juvies are most at risk of incurring population-level impacts.
     
  4. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    Ok... I get what your trying to say but the question I've asked is not answered. I'll ask a different one. What is expected to happen to pacific ocean salmon stock when farms are removed? They have been removed from other areas in this waterways and there have been no measurable increases in salmon stocks.
     
  5. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    I'm I correct in saying this all comes from the farming of atlantics in pacific waters?
     
  6. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    Well The Norwegians (not exactly AM-loving eco-freaks) decided in 1997 (National Action Plan Against Salmon Lice on Salmonids) to adress impacts from sea lice from their farms on their wild Atlantics:
    http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004484860500030X
    http://agris.fao.org/agris-search/search.do?recordID=US201300994991
    http://www.int-res.com/articles/aei2011/1/q001p233.pdf
    http://www.academia.edu/25560441/A_...ice_on_Salmonids_The_effect_on_wild_salmonids
    http://www.oie.int/fileadmin/Home/eng/Publications_&_Documentation/docs/pdf/revue_plurithematique/2015/09112015-00070-EN-Pettersen.pdf
    http://www.miljodirektoratet.no/old...ntal objectives for Norwegian aquaculture.pdf

    Doubt if they did that because they were bored.

    To directly answer your question: I believe some years we have robust enough ocean survival that wild salmon populations might be able to withstand extra population-level impacts from all sources - including sea lice and diseases from FFs. Other years - not so much. If we did a better job publically reporting and investigating things like disease outbreaks - and had more money to spend on stock assessment - maybe we wouldn't be stuck in this debate...
     
    Last edited: Oct 12, 2016
    bones likes this.
  7. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    No - the open netpen technology is predominantly the issue.
     
    bones likes this.
  8. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    Maybe and just maybe if the pacific region had more money dfo could do a better job and hatcheries could go back to producing and fish will be everywhere. You can't deny that smolt production is down in every hatchery and that is because of money.
     
    Clint r likes this.
  9. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    So your saying that pacific salmon are also to blame for lice infestations..... Interesting.
     
  10. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    No... I am saying the open net cage technology cannot isolate nor mitigate negative wild/cultured stock interactions - no matter which direction they go - and they go both directions.
     
  11. agentaqua

    agentaqua Well-Known Member

    Yes and no.. We shouldn't have wild stocks on life support from here until eternity. There should be an exit strategy - and a strategy on how to deal with introgression. We should give them a chance.
     
  12. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    So your saying that closing down farms across the planet and wild stock will rebound?
     
    CVmike likes this.
  13. Clint r

    Clint r Well-Known Member

    Maybe, maybe not. Can't tell til it happens. At least there'd be one less obstacle in their way.
     
  14. Clint r

    Clint r Well-Known Member

    Lack of money is definitely an issue. DFO and the way they handle the FF industry is a bigger problem. FF should be a small part of DFO fisheries managment with full resources put towards managing wild stocks.
     
    trophywife and bigdogeh like this.
  15. bones

    bones Well-Known Member

    Yes you can tell, it has happened on some systems and still no fish returns. So shutting down the rest will be the return of wild stocks? Pretty terrible science practice. I hasn't worked for the capilano Seymour or Indian as well as a handful of small streams but closing the rest of the fish farms will?
     
  16. Clint r

    Clint r Well-Known Member

    No, you can't. It might take
    A hundred years or more for a
    System to recover. If it ever does. You don't need science to understand that. It's common sense. Wonder why the cohen commission formed and figures there's issues if there's no science to back it up?
     
  17. Clint r

    Clint r Well-Known Member

    Wonder how the wild stocks are doing in countries where they've gone away from net pens? Anybody know?
     
  18. Clint r

    Clint r Well-Known Member

    Way to Put words in his mouth.
     
  19. Clint r

    Clint r Well-Known Member

    I'll clarify: wether sea lice, over fishing or habitat destruction, you don't know how long it would take a given run to
    Recover.
     
  20. terrin

    terrin Well-Known Member

    If your talking Wild "our future fish" lets find out how quickly they bounce back. If your talking Farmed Fish "our future fish" promote their positives as being raised in closed containment systems. The example you raise as to Burrard inlet all the smolts leaving rivers in the Burrard inlet go either outside into the Juan de Fuca or inside up the Strait of Georgia. If they go up the inside they are met with a never ending gauntlet of Sea lice infected fish farms and once they get more than three or more lice on them they are doomed.
     
    bigdogeh and trophywife like this.

Share This Page