ClayoquotKid
Active Member
Too funny Cuttlefish, I was thinking the same thing.
This is kind of what I had imagined....
This is kind of what I had imagined....
Aquaculture Net Pens are Fish Traps for Wild Small Fish!
- Thread starter Whole in the Water
- Start date
Andrew P
Well-Known Member
CK, I didn't say salmon farm industry for the krill....I said 'feed industry', which would include the other things you mention.
You seem to be missing my whole point of the unsustainability of the herring roe industry....is that because deep down maybe you agree with me??!!
I know that the herring by-product is a drop in the bucket in the global grande scheme.....but it matters a great deal locally. I do agree that local is the way of the future....and you can see my ideological(and perhaps over the top) view of this in the thread that I started about how I view a sustainable world of aquaculture in the Pacific Salmon Initiative thread.
Don't forget...I consider myself a fish farmer, but perhaps not in the same way that you are. I am actively involved in the enhancement of both herring(helped found the Salish Sea Herring Enhancement Society) and salmon(most notably the Coho bearing stream at the end of my street along with other projects) with the end goal(maybe selfishly to some) of being able to harvest salmon(and halibut, crab and prawns, which all deppend heavily on herring) to feed my family.
It is in all of our interests that we bust your guys balls on here, without public pressure, no positive change would happen.
You seem to be missing my whole point of the unsustainability of the herring roe industry....is that because deep down maybe you agree with me??!!
I know that the herring by-product is a drop in the bucket in the global grande scheme.....but it matters a great deal locally. I do agree that local is the way of the future....and you can see my ideological(and perhaps over the top) view of this in the thread that I started about how I view a sustainable world of aquaculture in the Pacific Salmon Initiative thread.
Don't forget...I consider myself a fish farmer, but perhaps not in the same way that you are. I am actively involved in the enhancement of both herring(helped found the Salish Sea Herring Enhancement Society) and salmon(most notably the Coho bearing stream at the end of my street along with other projects) with the end goal(maybe selfishly to some) of being able to harvest salmon(and halibut, crab and prawns, which all deppend heavily on herring) to feed my family.
It is in all of our interests that we bust your guys balls on here, without public pressure, no positive change would happen.
ClayoquotKid
Active Member
I'm glad to hear that you are an active volunteer for enhancement - it is something that is very important and I'm always looking for ways for my company to assist and be involved.
I know you had questions about the Omega Pacific and privatization of enhancement, but I just don't see it going that way - The structure of DFO is completely different than the US and I don't see anyone actually turning a profit (creating a terminal fishery like they do in Alaska) under the nose of DFO and actually getting licensed to release fish.
First Nations food fisheries may be a different story though...
I don't think the herring roe fishery is the best idea given the relative abundance issues and reliance on it from other species - that being said if it is well managed and the byproduct can be used to create more value for BC, then I'm good with it.
Your whole tone previously was entirely anti-salmon farming (sham etc.) so it was no stretch to think you were talking about it when you mentioned the krill.
Read some of the links I put up from Cermaq and especially Ewos about how the feed is being created using less and less wild sourced components - it is the whole direction of research and your sustainability concerns are shared by us all.
Englishman
Well-Known Member
Wow, is that ever a classic example of the pot calling the kettle black CK!
Salmon feed lots have been demonstrated to have a detrimental impact CK. It is all there in the published science. It is not “us guys” as you put it. It is there in black and white and documented all over the world. Here, once again are just a few of the scientifically documented impacts that you dismiss as “spaghetti”. So don’t spout all that crap about “hate on” Basically you have no understanding of science CK and no respect for scientists who challenge your religion. More on that one later since you brought it up!
Impacts on wild fish populations
- General
http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/63/7/1162.short
http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/f91-055#.UaTaVJwalzM
http://www.iatp.org/files/Marine_Aquaculture_in_the_United_States_Enviro.htm
- Thru’ Sea lice infestation
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/02/080212085841.htm
http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/272/1564/689.short
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/10641260500433531#.UZ-mUMoambs
http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/pdf/10.1139/f04-016
http://www.pnas.org/content/103/42/15506.short
http://books.google.ca/books?hl=en&...mN9VDE#v=onepage&q=fish farm sea lice&f=false
http://vhost1.ucs.sfu.ca:9870/science/resources/1320967624.pdf
http://icesjms.oxfordjournals.org/content/59/1/131.short
http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1046/j.1365-2109.2001.00627.x/abstract
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S004484860500030X
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/M04-149.1#.UaQgapwalzM
http://www.nrcresearchpress.com/doi/abs/10.1139/f10-105#.UaQmD5walzM
http://www.sciencemag.org/content/318/5857/1772.short
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/M07-042.1#.UaTWlpwalzM
- Thru’ Disease Transmission and Interaction
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/004484869190392K
http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1577/1548-8667(1998)010<0107:ROTHPA>2.0.CO;2#.UaTaA5walzM
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/004484869190370M
http://rsif.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/4/15/699.short
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0020751907000100
http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/0044848686901675
- Thru’ Harvesting wild fish for Feed
http://www.theecologist.org/trial_in...s_in_peru.html
Very condescending of you CK. Again, science has already shed more light about the impacts of fish feed lots than you can even get your mind around. Because of your fish feed lot “religion” (and your industry arrogance that you know best and are exempt from ecology 101 interactions that govern the way nature works) you conveniently ignore ALL of this evidence.
What you completely ignore CK, is the fact that the size of the risk is one thing, but the consequences of the realisation of that risk are another. You can continue to ignore all the science and dismiss all the risks as known or “small” (whatever that means) but the consequences of any one of these risk factors kicking is a threat to all the wild salmon stocks and the ecology of the entire coast. No one gave your industry permission to put all that risk CK. Your industry originally just took these risks on in complete ignorance. And the consequences are unfolding now in the scientific literature.
You keep focusing on just fish populations impacts, whereas the impacts documented in the above science papers are not just population impacts, but cover a far broader set of impacts than that.
I had a good laugh at this one. It is you who are the fundamentalist ignoring all the evidence! It is your “industry church” that provides you with all your dogma that enables you to ignore with such breathtaking ignorance all of the evidence from independent researchers out there.!!
And ultimately your “faith” will never be broken, no matter what the scientific evidence because it provides you with a living. The ultimate article of “faith” is to decry and condemn all of the “unbelievers”, if it threatens your “holy industry church”.
ClayoquotKid
Active Member
Ahhh, yes - the nebulous "misinformation" defense...
The defination of which lies in the eyes of the same PR hacks who coined the phrase originally for the tobacco lobby, but then got hired to work for the fish farms. Often pulled out and used when the pro-lobby wishes to try miminize and isolate real critiques and issues that they don't really wish to discuss - but rather wish to misdirect the conversation. Thanks for demonstarting that tactic here, birdsnest.
Public pressure is having an effect - that's why you prowl, Birdsnest.
Oh - CK: if you go back and re-read the posts - I never called you a sociopath (at least not directly). I even once or twice was clear about not including you in my rants. I called the PR firms and employees, and certain politicians in the government - sociopaths. if you saw traits reflected in your mirror and thought that labelled you - that would be your decision - not mine.
It's interesting how many industry boosters silently prowl this forum, only surfacing when they see one of their own taking it on the chin. They appear afraid of having their defensive paradigm shift through open dialogue and debate.
I'm very grateful for all the concerned and informed posters on here who don't back-down in their search for the truth. Thanks to all - another enlightening thread.
PS - was that you and birdsnest in that last photo?
Last edited by a moderator:
ClayoquotKid
Active Member
Similar threads
