Aquaculture; improving????

Is fish farm partnership necessity or ‘disaster’?

A Department of Natural Resources’ drone image shows a net pen that collapsed off of Cypress Island on August 28, 2017, releasing hundreds of thousands of Atlantic salmon into Puget Sound. Net pens like this one will be used in Port Angeles in the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe’s new joint venture with Cooke Aquaculture to rear black cod and steelhead. Photo courtesy of Department of Natural Resources
Posted Wednesday, November 13, 2019 3:00 am

The Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe announced in early October a new partnership with Cooke Aquaculture to rear black cod and sterile all-female rainbow trout in Port Angeles, much to the dismay of wild salmon conservationists who say marine net pens are an “environmental disaster.”
The announcement of the new joint venture comes just as the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has been receiving public comment on a proposal to issue a five-year Marine Aquaculture Permit to Cooke Aquaculture to culture all-female triploid rainbow trout/steelhead in existing commercial marine net-pens in Puget Sound.

The Port Angeles project will be a 50-50 venture between the Jamestown S’Klallam and Cooke.

“We will co-manage it together,” said Kurt Grinnell, general manager of Jamestown Seafoods. The new farm will require reinstatement of Cooke’s previous farm lease at Port Angeles. The lease on the Port Angeles farm—which was previously used to rear Atlantic salmon—was expired by the state’s Department of Natural Resources after it was deemed unsafe and illegal. Cooke is currently suing over DNR’s cancellation of its Port Angeles lease.

That cancellation followed the disastrous summer of 2017, when some of Cooke’s net pens failed, hundreds of thousands of Atlantic salmon escaped into Puget Sound and the Legislature voted to phase Atlantic net pen farming out of practice.

“If you look at net pen farming around the world, it doesn’t matter where you are or who’s been doing it, it’s basically always an environmental disaster,” said Kurt Beardslee, Executive Director of the Wild Fish Conservancy, a group that advocates for wild fish conservation in Washington and beyond.

But farming native species like black cod and all-female, sterile rainbow trout means there is less of an impact in the case of an accidental release, said the manager of the tribe’s seafood enterprise. Grinnell said if fish escape, these are native species, not invasive like the Atlantic salmon conservationists feared would damage native runs of anadromous fish.

And the fact that they are sterile means there’s no chance of breeding and furthering the habitat disturbance.

“We are currently installing brand new pens,” Grinnell said. “They originally bought pens from Icicle Seafoods in 2016. They bought that older equipment in disrepair. Cooke, as far as we can see, has rectified their pens by replacing them with new equipment.”

But beyond the possibility of net pens breaking and sending thousands of farmed salmon into the Sound, net pens are also a breeding ground for disease, Beardslee said.

“In the wild, when an animal gets sick, it is taken out by predators,” he said. “In net pens, all those animals are protected by the pen. The animals are so close together that if one gets sick, the rest get sick. Then those viruses go back into the natural environment.”

Net pens are in high tidal flushing areas, where viruses have a high chance of surviving for days after they’ve left the host, he added.

Because of the higher amount of disease and viruses in net pens, fish farmers use more pharmaceuticals. These chemicals used to kill disease are flushed into Puget Sound, with unknown consequences for natural ecosystems.

According to Grinnell, the Tribe and Cooke will avoid these issues by vaccinating their fish beforehand.

“We catch our broodstock out here in the ocean and raise the black cod at the Manchester Research Laboratory before they go into the net pens,” he said. “The steelhead eggs are the same eggs the state uses for their trophy trout program.”

“We do vaccinate the fish before they’re put out in the environment. That way we don’t have to worry about antibiotics.”

Conservationists like Beardslee are also concerned about the amount of fecal pollution and food waste that goes to the floor of the ocean from net pen farming.

“What other farming business doesn’t have to process their waste before it goes into the Puget Sound?” Beardslee said. “Other farmers can’t do that.”

But the Tribe, which is partnered with National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and University of Washington researchers at their Manchester Research Laboratory, are looking for ways to lessen this potential impact on the environment.

Underwater cameras will be used to monitor fish feeding. When fish are done eating, the feeding stops, to reduce excess feed that can load nutrients into seawater and sea floors below pens.

They are also hoping to experiment with other native species to battle the waste problem.

“We’re working on growing sea cucumbers to help collect and filter waste,” Grinnell said. “We’re constantly bringing people on board to bring fish farming to have the least amount of impact possible.”

In 2017, the Wild Fish Conservancy filed a suit against Cooke Aquaculture under section 505 of the Clean Water Act, with the goal of holding the company responsible for the negligent release of over 100,000 farmed Atlantic salmon into public waters.

For the Jamestown S’Klallam Tribe, which is well-known for its work on restoring riparian habitat for wild salmon runs, including the removal of the Elwha River dam, teaming up with a private entity under attack from salmon conservationists seems like an unusual choice.

“We, along with our sister tribes, are strong stewards of our environment,” stated Ron Allen, chairman of the Tribe in a press release. “We firmly believe we can implement net pen aquaculture consistent with our Tribal heritage and cultural values.”

It isn’t unusual for net pen aquaculture businesses to team up with tribes along the West Coast.

In Canada’s Clayoquot Sound, the aquaculture operator Cermaq Canada partnered with the Ahousaht Tribe to put net pens in the First Nation’s territory.

According to reporting from the BBC, Cermaq has an agreement with the Ahousaht to operate in their territory that includes employment benefits and sustainable handling of its farms.

But Cermaq has been under fire from Ahousaht authorities after high levels of sea lice were found in farmed Atlantic salmon.

Cermaq, which operates their net pens in the UNESCO biosphere area of Clayoquot Sound, were put on notice by the Ahousaht to do better in their management of sea lice, according to an open letter from Cermaq’s managing director, David Kiemele.

After bringing in a special barge called a “Hydrolicer” to remove sea lice from the net pen farms, in September of 2019, Cermaq still reported a high number of sea lice found on juvenile salmon at their Dixon Bay net pen site.

Meanwhile, other Tribes’ have been advocates on the front lines against net pens.

The ‘Namgis First Nation in Vancouver Island has held on-water protests and occupied fish farms in opposition to the practice.

The Tribe recently lost its court bid to prevent the restocking of an open-net salmon farm in its territories off northern Vancouver Island.

“Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) has again failed to protect wild salmon by refusing to prohibit transfers of Atlantic salmon infected with the Piscine orthoreovirus (PRV) into fish farms along the migratory routes of wild salmon,” wrote Chief Don Svanvik after the court bid was lost.

For Beardslee, who has been advocating for the aquaculture industry to move to on-land fish farming instead of marine net pens, it was not a surprise to hear the Jamestown S’Klallam would be partnering with Cooke.

“If you look at the history of this industry, they do this pretty much everywhere they go,” he said. “They try to bring in First Nations to partner with them to try and give them some kind of credibility.”

But Grinnell said the tribe’s goal is to ease market pressure on wild salmon.

“We’ve extracted as much from our oceans as we can,” he said. “We’re maxxed out. So we’re going to have to look for other ways to have a clean, healthy protein.”

He’s not opposed to moving fish farming indoors, but it’s not yet economically viable.

“We’re trying,” he said. “The steelhead already spent half of its life indoors, in a hatchery. But fish need space and lots of clean water—we’re talking millions of gallons of water.”
Fish farming in Puget Sound is still a cleaner activity than much of the livestock raising that happens in the United States, he said.
“We don’t claim that there’s zero impact,” he said. “Anytime you grow food there’s going to be an environmental impact.”
He also agreed that Cooke has made mistakes in the past that can’t be ignored.
“Mistakes happen in every industry,” he said. “But that doesn’t mean we should avert our eyes. Instead we need to follow all the regulations, inspections and best practices.”
The venture won’t be able to get off the ground until WDFW completes its public process in examining Cooke’s proposal to farm steelhead and black cod in the Puget Sound.
One concern with the proposal is that it uses an environmental impact statement that is dated to 1990.
“Thousands are asking for an Environmental Impact Statement that isn’t 30 years old,” Beardslee said. The Wild Fish Conservancy is hoping to present data to WDFW that will show there are more environmental impacts than previously thought.
Beardslee encouraged members of the public to do their own research into net pens and Cooke’s history.
“I think the public has already spoken with the banning of the Atlantic net pens,” he said. “The bottom line relative to the Tribe considering this is that there is no right way to do the wrong thing.”
 
Great opportunity for deflection for the agent there. I’m sure he/SHE won’t miss.
The narrative from the anti salmon farmers has always included a portion of indigenous opposition to salmon farming an how they’re opposition is paramount in the reconciliation process. Now that the tables are turning and First Nation are supporting salmon farming on the west coast those apposed to salmon farming are hypocritically changing their opinion on that file.
Obviously this was predicable but now serves as yet another example of the hypocritical behaviour by frontline career anti aquaculture campaigners.
 
Wow agent, over 120 words, when one, no, would have worked! You should get into politics, I hear Elizabeth May is hiring :)
 
Rico - The "C" in "CFIA" is "CANADIAN". DFO is federal. The labs are federal. The ocean is federal. The industry support is also federal - including the funding sources.

On the East Coast nobody has yet taken the Provinces to court - as did Morton. So the provinces are still playing the role that BC did just a few years ago. So - wrt siting applications & tenures - ya provincial. So - a few different regulations there - you are correct.

But the lack of risk assessment and protection to the wild stocks is still DFOs bailiwick across the board - or it supposed to be. and it has failed ever since the open net-cages started in Canada - that's the similarity across the board - across Canada.

I think the dysfunction stems from the industry's "lubrication" - $ to politicians and a few jobs in a few areas that will never likely again have abundant runs of salmon to depend on instead. Kinda a sad and tragic repeat performance everywhere - Western Scotland - Southwestern NB, and now Southern NFLD.
And..

A big shout-out to the pundits on this thread confirming and illustrating the points I made in Post #458: "And when confronted with accountability they resort to the same tactics of belligerence and personal attacks - rather than accepting that there should be accountability and oversight and that they are using the public's resources and putting the public's wild salmon at some level of risk."

Accountability can appear frustrating to those whom have little experience with it.
 
Last edited:
Sorry but your flat out wrong......
The east coast salmon farming started 20 years after the west coast, there still 10 years behind. This is because they are following east coast rules and directives. Psst, it's called the Atlantic ocean, were on a forum in the Pacific Ocean

Were is the C..... in Norway, Scotland, Chile, russia, Japan?

Facts are facts you can dismiss them as you please, seems there isnt to many problems to link here in BC so to get your point across you are using issues across a complete ocean to support your agenda. Professionals call this lubricating your agenda. Do you have anything new that supports aquaculture here in BC? Sorry...... to many improvements over the years???
 
From a couple pages back...posting it one last time in case a couple people missed it. Next step will be bans for those who can't seem to resist.

Going to nip this in the bud. Keep your personal innuendos about other members out of the forum. Some of you are new here since we lifted our moratorium on FF threads that was precipitated by all the personal and general nonsense that started to occur. We won't shut this thread down but bans will be handed out to those of you that can't resist calling others out or making it personal.
 
@Admin It would be helpful if you would use some examples openly when moderating so that we all know what you are speaking about. Other wise it seems like posting here is a game of Russian roulette.
We are all using terms on both sides of the discussion that can be deemed personal but there are never any defined boundary’s.
Please be more specific.
Looks like to me that by giving a public warning without examples empowers you to ban who you want when you want.
shot gun banning just doesn’t seem very reasonable without setting specific examples of what you are warning about.
 
@Admin It would be helpful if you would use some examples openly when moderating so that we all know what you are speaking about. Other wise it seems like posting here is a game of Russian roulette.
We are all using terms on both sides of the discussion that can be deemed personal but there are never any defined boundary’s.
Please be more specific.
Looks like to me that by giving a public warning without examples empowers you to ban who you want when you want.
shot gun banning just doesn’t seem very reasonable without setting specific examples of what you are warning about.
To be honest - I am completely confused on this. I think I will be banned for asking others to respond after they accuse you of deflecting and not responding. Then you respond and ask for an in kind response, and are on the edge? Not really certain what the rules are, but seems one side has a lot more support from the admins then the other. I guess, as many have said, I should go put back on my tinfoil hat.

Admins, to be honest, a spirited debate is a healthy sign of democracy. Sometimes it is messy and might over step boundaries, but it should be defended and supported - not shut down. This isn't hate speech. If you don't want FF supporters, it is easy to ban us all. But, I think when threads only have one side putting up a debate, they become stale and uninteresting - also less clicks! I personally would never support you banning AA, GLG or Fogged In even though I disagree with them on almost everything (hyperbole). It is worthy for me to see how they think and if they rub me the wrong way, that's OK, we need to learn from each other. Hopefully I can post tomorrow. Cheers.
 
A good read indeed. Dr. Pennell’s piece provides a good background as to why the net penners have so little support along this coast. I got a good giggle reading about his trip to Powell River as BCSFA spokesman so many years ago. Not sure what he was expecting but the stories I heard about that time of mass farmed fish die offs in Sechelt Inlet due to algae blooms and the rotting fish stinking up the beaches, fish farm infrastructure abandoned by bankruptcies in front of foreshore properties whose owners were not consulted beforehand and who didn’t want them in the first place, etc. would have had my back up as well. Rebuilding the social licence has been an uphill battle ever since.
Time has passed and new rules have been brought in by the various regulators over the years have helped but still are poorly enforced. I also think that fish farms being the “new face on the block” during a time of continued wild salmon declines makes it that much harder to rebuild any trust or support going forward.
 
closed containment needs improving or just lots of cold hard cash. Been looking for investors for a while now but seems like the risk is so high investors are not making any attractive offers to the Nagmis First Nations whom are stuck with it. Collateral damage. NGO’s don’t seem to care. There not $kicking$ in to what is their idea.


“According to year-end financial documents that are posted online, Kuterra Limited Partnership had assets of $1,039,332 and liabilities of $3,029,022 as at March 31, 2018, and revenues of $2,231,462 and a net loss of $345,476 for the year then ended.”


https://www.northislandgazette.com/...xt-step-with-land-based-salmon-farm-kuterra/#
 
Speaking of salmon farming in Canada being ONLY "10 years behind":

In 2000 Saucier et. al developed a particle tracking model to determine flow of water in the St. Lawrence estuary in Canada. Almost immediately regulators and modellers in Scotland jumped on this opportunity to model sea lice transport in Scottish estuaries from fish farms:

www.academia.edu/download/40332627/Modelling_salmon_lice_dispersal_in_Loch_20151124-10454-cbmmeu.pdf
https://www.int-res.com/articles/ab2007/1/b001p063.pdf
https://agupubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/pdf/10.1029/2006JC003806
https://www.researchgate.net/profil...sea-lice-dispersion-in-Scottish-Sea-Lochs.pdf

In Canada there are those in the industry still believe or want you to believe that sea lice aren't a problem for wild salmon and they don't report lice levels in NFLD - yep you are right there, Rico.

The current Canadian site applications do not identify things such as larger oceanographic patterns of water circulation, or smolt migration patterns. Scotland not only accepts sea lice transfer to wild stocks as a reality - but uses Canadian modeling technology (i.e. Saucier et al.) to model sea lice plumes and oceanographic circulation patterns in Scotland.

Yet the industry often still denies it is a problem here, back in Canada.

Instead site applications only look at effects that are within an arbitrary and scientifically indefensible 1 km radius. This speaks to the lack of scope and small scale included in the assessment process, both of which are inappropriate given the wide scope and large scale of potential impacts.

The assumption for the 1 km radius is presumably that fish only swim 1 km, or maybe fish are most experienced with the metric system, verse the standard English system.

The reality is that many inland salmon smolts swim tens, if not hundreds of km downstream to the ocean, and potentially circulate thousands of km first South to North along the coast, then out to the Alaska gyre, and back again along the same route.

The reality is if scoping was included, it would have to be accepted that fish do swim - that they swim more than 1km, and that they swim into Alaska waters. This means that CEAA open net-cage applications would then be bumped into the highest CEAA process - the panel review, due to transboundary effects - and the Alaskans would then be invited to participate on the board. Alaska - where open net-cage Atlantic salmon aquaculture is illegal.

Maybe regulation of the industry is actually more than 10 years behind in Canada.
 
The reality is if scoping was included, it would have to be accepted that fish do swim - that they swim more than 1km, and that they swim into Alaska waters. This means that CEAA open net-cage applications would then be bumped into the highest CEAA process - the panel review, due to transboundary effects - and the Alaskans would then be invited to participate on the board. Alaska - where open net-cage Atlantic salmon aquaculture is illegal.

Where did you get this from?
 
In Canada there are those in the industry still believe or want you to believe that sea lice aren't a problem for wild salmon and they don't report lice levels in NFLD - yep you are right there, Rico.
Sounds kinda insulting........ I didnt mention sealice or problems for wild salmon or reporting problems in NFLD.
Not sure why you are poking me in the eye.
 
Back
Top