Aquaculture; improving????

FF pundits due to their apparent lack of understanding & seemingly lack of responsibility for their potential and realized impacts on wild stocks.

I thought u were going to stop labeling people . You just can’t help your self can you.

Your essentially calling people that support fish farms stupid.

If the admins wonder why this thread gets out of control.

It’s shots like these that drive people bananas.

Yet you continue to do it after being asked not to 100 times.
 
you misunderstand my post, WMY. I am discussing industry spokespersons - which is fair game when discussing any industry and it's impacts and the defense of those impacts by industry. It's called accountability and social licence. I did not single out any poster. If you wish to self-identify with the term "FF pundit" that is your choice and your prerogative - not mine. More on social licence see: https://www.intrafish.com/commentary/was-i-wrong-about-salmon-farming-/2-1-708899
 
Well who are you talking about if your are talking about the person in the peace the. Just use there name. If your talking about something someone has linked then talk about it.

I don’t think I’m wrong when u use the term for pundits you are referring to members here that post pro FF stuff.

i used to respect what you post but now you just have resorting to using ENGO talking points and labels. If someone does no agree with you they are some evil pundit that is stupid.

Again you are once again trying label me by somehow saying that it’s my choice.

Keep taking shot AA.
 
and again - that would be your choice and your prerogative to receive those rebuttals as you wish to interpret the term "industry pundit" - not mine. Accountability for the FF pundit denials is not going away.

Honesty, transparency and social licence is something that the industry has performed poorly on - both recently - and historically - until the regulators cannot ignore the public outcry anymore. That's what happened with 1st the sea lice controversy about 15-20 years ago - and is now happening with disease transfer.

The unfortunate reality is that the open net-cage industry cannot guarantee "less than minimal" impacts to wild stocks using the open net-cage technology that they want to keep using. They really can't defend the choice anymore - so industry pundits attempt to deflect the conversation and pretend that the science doesn't exist that indicates a big problem.

The discussion actually needs to happen with the regulators & the politicians that create legislation verses the pundits - but this forum is good prep for that conversation - and I thank the pundits for illustrating the speaking notes for DFO ahead of time - so that those who know change needs to happen are prepared for the stalling, lies and misinformation that pops-up from the PR outfits for the industry that DFO uses.
 
Last edited:
and again - that would be your choice and your prerogative to receive those rebuttals as you wish to interpret the term "industry pundit" - not mine.
Well who are you talking about if your are talking about the person in the peace the. Just use there name. If your talking about something someone has linked then talk about it.

I don’t think I’m wrong when u use the term for pundits you are referring to members here that post pro FF stuff.

i used to respect what you post but now you just have resorting to using ENGO talking points and labels. If someone does no agree with you they are some evil pundit that is stupid.

Again you are once again trying label me by somehow saying that it’s my choice.

Keep taking shot AA.

lot of material to fan the flames of the old .....

index.php
 
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/jfd.12228/abstract

Potential disease interaction reinforced: double-virus-infected escaped farmed Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., recaptured in a nearby river.

A S Madhun, E Karlsbakk, C H Isachsen, L M Omdal, A G Eide Sørvik, O Skaala, B T Barlaup, K A Glover
Journal of Fish Diseases (Impact Factor: 1.59). 01/2014; DOI:10.1111/jfd.12228
Source: PubMed
ABSTRACT The role of escaped farmed salmon in spreading infectious agents from aquaculture to wild salmonid populations is largely unknown. This is a case study of potential disease interaction between escaped farmed and wild fish populations. In summer 2012, significant numbers of farmed Atlantic salmon were captured in the Hardangerfjord and in a local river. Genetic analyses of 59 of the escaped salmon and samples collected from six local salmon farms pointed out the most likely source farm, but two other farms had an overlapping genetic profile. The escapees were also analysed for three viruses that are prevalent in fish farming in Norway. Almost all the escaped salmon were infected with salmon alphavirus (SAV) and piscine reovirus (PRV). To use the infection profile to assist genetic methods in identifying the likely farm of origin, samples from the farms were also tested for these viruses. However, in the current case, all the three farms had an infection profile that was similar to that of the escapees. We have shown that double-virus-infected escaped salmon ascend a river close to the likely source farms, reinforcing the potential for spread of viruses to wild salmonids.

https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060924
Molecular Genetic Analysis of Stomach Contents Reveals Wild Atlantic Cod Feeding on Piscine Reovirus (PRV) Infected Atlantic Salmon Originating from a Commercial Fish Farm
Kevin Alan Glover1*, Anne Grete Eide Sørvik1, Egil Karlsbakk1, Zhiwei Zhang2, Øystein Skaala1
1 Institute of Marine Research, Bergen, Norway, 2 Jiangsu Institute of Marine Fisheries, NanTong City, P. R. China

Abstract
In March 2012, fishermen operating in a fjord in Northern Norway reported catching Atlantic cod, a native fish forming an economically important marine fishery in this region, with unusual prey in their stomachs. It was speculated that these could be Atlantic salmon, which is not typical prey for cod at this time of the year in the coastal zone. These observations were therefore reported to the Norwegian Directorate of Fisheries as a suspected interaction between a local fish farm and this commercial fishery. Statistical analyses of genetic data from 17 microsatellite markers genotyped on 36 partially degraded prey, samples of salmon from a local fish farm, and samples from the nearest wild population permitted the following conclusions: 1. The prey were Atlantic salmon, 2. These salmon did not originate from the local wild population, and 3. The local farm was the most probable source of these prey. Additional tests demonstrated that 21 of the 36 prey were infected with piscine reovirus. While the potential link between piscine reovirus and the disease heart and skeletal muscle inflammation is still under scientific debate, this disease had caused mortality of large numbers of salmon in the farm in the month prior to the fishermen’s observations. These analyses provide new insights into interactions between domesticated and wild fish.

p.6: "Four main conclusions can be drawn from these analyses: 1. The partially digested and morphologically difficult to identify prey were revealed to be Atlantic salmon, 2. Based upon several independent genetic parameters, these salmon prey were identified as farmed and not from the local wild population, thus demonstrating this to be a human induced, as opposed to natural phenomena, 3. Despite partial digestion, the majority of the prey, including the single escapee, carried detectable levels of PRV. PRV is associated with the disease HSMI [32,33]. This disease had caused significant mortality of salmon on the local farm in the immediate time-period prior to the prey being captured in the wild cod, 4."

http://www.plosone.org/article/fetchObject.action?uri=info:doi/10.1371/journal.pone.0082202&representation=PDF

Phylogenetic Evidence of Long Distance Dispersal and Transmission of Piscine Reovirus (PRV) between Farmed and Wild Atlantic Salmon
A˚se Helen Garseth1,2*, Torbjørn Ekrem2, Eirik Biering1
1Department of Health Surveillance, Norwegian Veterinary Institute, Trondheim, Norway, 2Department of Natural History, Norwegian University of Science and Technology University Museum, Trondheim, Norway

Abstract
The extent and effect of disease interaction and pathogen exchange between wild and farmed fish populations is an ongoing debate and an area of research that is difficult to explore. The objective of this study was to investigate pathogen transmission between farmed and wild Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.) populations in Norway by means of molecular epidemiology. Piscine reovirus (PRV) was selected as the model organism as it is widely distributed in both farmed and wild Atlantic salmon in Norway, and because infection not necessarily will lead to mortality through development of disease. A matrix comprised of PRV protein coding sequences S1, S2 and S4 from wild, hatchery-reared and farmed Atlantic salmon in addition to one sea-trout (Salmo trutta L.) was examined. Phylogenetic analyses based on maximum likelihood and Bayesian inference indicate long distance transport of PRV and exchange of virus between populations. The results are discussed in the context of Atlantic salmon ecology and the structure of the Norwegian salmon industry. We conclude that the lack of a geographical pattern in the phylogenetic trees is caused by extensive exchange of PRV. In addition, the detailed topography of the trees indicates long distance transportation of PRV. Through its size, structure and infection status, the Atlantic salmon farming industry has the capacity to play a central role in both long distance transportation and transmission of pathogens. Despite extensive migration, wild salmon probably play a minor role as they are fewer in numbers, appear at lower densities and are less likely to be infected. An open question is the relationship between the PRV sequences found in marine fish and those originating from salmon.
 
Last edited:
and again - that would be your choice and your prerogative to receive those rebuttals as you wish to interpret the term "industry pundit" - not mine. Accountability for the FF pundit denials is not going away.

Honesty, transparency and social licence is something that the industry has performed poorly on - both recently - and historically - until the regulators cannot ignore the public outcry anymore. That's what happened with 1st the sea lice controversy about 15-20 years ago - and is now happening with disease transfer.

The unfortunate reality is that the open net-cage industry cannot guarantee "less than minimal" impacts to wild stocks using the open net-cage technology that they want to keep using. They really can't defend the choice anymore - so industry pundits attempt to deflect the conversation and pretend that the science doesn't exist that indicates a big problem.

The discussion actually needs to happen with the regulators & the politicians that create legislation verses the pundits - but this forum is good prep for that conversation - and I thank the pundits for illustrating the speaking notes for DFO ahead of time - so that those who know change needs to happen are prepared for the stalling, lies and misinformation that pops-up from the PR outfits for the industry that DFO uses.

Who are you talking about that’s what I don’t understand.

If you are not responding to members on here are you just typing a monologue
 
lot of material to fan the flames of the old .....

index.php

This nonsense is an example of the kind of BS that won't be tolerated in these threads.

agentaqua said:
and again - that would be your choice and your prerogative to receive those rebuttals as you wish to interpret the term "industry pundit" - not mine.

Brian stop being ridiculous


@ChinookExerciser posted this which I caught before he deleted it. My name is Brian and I have two accounts, one is SportfishingBC and one is Admin. Not sure who you are referring to here but if you feel like you need to direct something at me, those are your choices. I have already banned a member on the so called "anti side" awhile back for crossing the line in terms of respect and decorum. @Birdsnest asked for some examples of what would get members banned. I think you are all smart enough and well enough read to avoid the ban button, but these posts and a few others on the last couple pages are really close to the edge. If I have to explain it further, maybe people should just back away or hit the ignore button provided to you.

You can carry on with your endless chasing of your own or each others tails all you want by posting endless studies, opinions and counterpoints to the latest unproven spew of content that proves nothing to either side that will change your firmly entrenched minds. But, if this tone continues there will be more members banned and it won't be for a short period of time. Finished babysitting this small crowd.

Brian Kowalko

Owner and Admin of SFBC
 
Can you proved some recent examples examples from the anti ff crew. Just wondering cuz seems like they get a pretty free reign here. You are saying it’s both sides but only providing example from one side. If the anti side is totally innocent then say so. Then we can understand some boundaries. It’s odd that the dumpster fire is so unacceptable from one side but a none issue on the other. Just odd.
 
Thanks again for your guidance, hard work and all you do Brian on this forum. Appreciate it.
 
Can you proved some recent examples examples from the anti ff crew. Just wondering cuz seems like they get a pretty free reign here. You are saying it’s both sides but only providing example from one side. If the anti side is totally innocent then say so. Then we can understand some boundaries. It’s odd that the dumpster fire is so unacceptable from one side but a none issue on the other. Just odd.

Didn't say the "dumpster fire" reference was personal, just said it was nonsense that won't be tolerated. Pretty clear. Anything else that is simply put into play to inflame this topic, anything that ends up in a back and forth conversation that does nothing but stir the pot, gets personal, disrespectful, etc will result in bans. Now, if you don't have the level of awareness to figure out what you shouldn't post then I suggest you stop posting.

This is the last post on this for this thread. The warnings have been posted, one member is already serving a timeout, and more will follow if necessary.

Brian
 
Didn't say the "dumpster fire" reference was personal, just said it was nonsense that won't be tolerated. Pretty clear. Anything else that is simply put into play to inflame this topic, anything that ends up in a back and forth conversation that does nothing but stir the pot, gets personal, disrespectful, etc will result in bans. Now, if you don't have the level of awareness to figure out what you shouldn't post then I suggest you stop posting.

This is the last post on this for this thread. The warnings have been posted, one member is already serving a timeout, and more will follow if necessary.

Brian
Thank-you for the quiet Admin.
 
In that article AA, it tells of millions of salmon dying do to algae blooms in a few different spots around the world. The article states that it cost the Aquaculture Industry billions. No company can sustain losses like that yet they are still around. Are they being paid for their losses?
Also makes me wonder about how many thousands of tons of forage fish went into fish meal to feed these farmed fish that die at 5 pounds. Considering it takes a few pounds of wild forage fish to grow 1 pound of Atlantic Salmon, these numbers of waste are unbelievable.
 
I believe fish convert at 1 to 1, or 1.2 to 1. Were as cattle the main protein producers convert 8 to 1. You maybe getting confused with poultry that convert at 2 to 1.
You also may look at fish meal isnt the only ingredient, commercial trim is used from around the world and is responsible for cutting back on the international trade of the by product fish meal.
There is also a beyond meat style of food that contains no fish meal or fish oil.
 
Back
Top