Are they Blind or stupid!

Check out:

www.adopt-a-fry.org

wildsalmoncircle.com

STOP BUYING FARMED SALMON

Write a letter to those incharge ( hand written is most effective, no postage required)


Prime minister Stephen Harper
80 Wellington St., Ottawa ON,K1A 0A2;
pm@pm.gc.ca; Fax: 613 941 6900


Gail Shea, Minister of fisheries and oceans
Parliament Buildings, Wellington St.,Ottawa ON, K1A 0A6;
min@dfo-mpo.gc.ca

Make sure to CC your local MP; find your MP'scontact info at:
http://canada.gc.ca/directories-repertoires/direct-eng.html#mp

andCC:BC Premier Gordon Campbell ( postage required to BC government)
PO Box 9041,STN PROV GOVT,Victoria BC,V8W 9E1;
premier@gov.bc.ca ; phone: 250 387 1715; fax 250 387 0087

Hope this helps


HL
 
Calling Barbender and Sockeyefry!!!

Where is your response to this serious environmental and economic issue. You defenders of fish farming have been noticibly quiet over the last while.

Please assure us with proof (not just basless, immature slags of Alexandra Morton) that drug resistant lice are not a problem here like there are in Norway - if you can!

Long live wild salmon!!!
><))))>
 
I haven't seen Morton provide one shred of scientific evidence that resistance to sea lice exists. She is very careful to say things like "could be", or " is possible" and the rest of you think she has proven a resistance. She hasn't proven squat. Let me see her test results from the resistance testing she has done. Until then it is more Morton lies. A heavier than normal lice loading does not mean anything other than a higher than normal lice loading brought on by environmental conditions which were more favourable to the lice.

In addition, tell me how a lice with a resistance to slice affects the wild fish?
 
quote:Originally posted by sockeyefry

I haven't seen Morton provide one shred of scientific evidence that resistance to sea lice exists. She is very careful to say things like "could be", or " is possible" and the rest of you think she has proven a resistance. She hasn't proven squat. Let me see her test results from the resistance testing she has done. Until then it is more Morton lies. A heavier than normal lice loading does not mean anything other than a higher than normal lice loading brought on by environmental conditions which were more favourable to the lice.

In addition, tell me how a lice with a resistance to slice affects the wild fish?
Click to expand...
I really don't understand the myopic focus on Morton - instead of responding to her quite legitimate questions.

1st - Morton is quite right in being concerned about the eventual build-up of slice resistance on lice in open net-pen facilities.

We have already discussed this at length, not only on this thread, but also at:

http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8847&whichpage=63
http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8847&whichpage=64
http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=14439

I know you already read these posts, sockeyefry - because I also saw your postings there.

2nd - Let's get the burden of proof on the right foot here. It isn't Morton's job to prove fish farmers are having an impact (although she has had to) - but instead industry's job to prove they are not - something they consistently refuse to do.

3rd - Morton is not the only one concerned about the build-up of resistance to slice by aquacultured lice - see:

Dr. Tor Einar Horsberg
Sea lice treatments: Effects, side effects and resistance development
http://sealice2010.com/main.php?site=horsberg

Dr. Larry Hammell
Anytime we deal with the management of a disease, parasites, bacteria, or whatever - in terrestrial animals like farm animals or dogs and cats or people - and in fish - so long as we rely on only one product - eventually that parasite or disease or organism will develop a tolerance to that drug - a resistance.
already posted this at 02/27/2010 : 14:44:57 on: http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8847&whichpage=64

Ian Denholm, Greg Devine & Tor Horsberg
"From even a rudimentary knowledge of factors promoting resistance to pesticides and chemotherapeutic agents, the appearance of insecticide resistance in sealice should be seen as no surprise, but rather as an inevitable consequence of management practices in some commercial fish production systems. In many respects, large-scale reliance on chemicals for lice control, coupled with the comparative genetic isolation of sealice populations, renders these systems a marine equivalent of horticultural glasshouses, in which insecticide resistance has historically developed most rapidly and has been particularly challenging to contain. As in conventional agriculture, effective management of resistance in sealice requires considerable effort to reduce and diversify the selection pressure for individual resistance genes. By drawing on parallels with insect pests, this paper will review some "C" 'critical' issues - including the role of pest ecology and genetics, resistance mechanisms and their implications for cross-resistance - pertaining to resistance in sealice, and explore the feasibility and likely effectiveness of possible management options."
http://www.ecoserve.ie/projects/sealice/abstract1.html

Myron Roth
"The use of dichlorvos is reviewed and presented as a case study in reduced sensitivity to chemotherapeutants. Key factors that most likely contributed to reduced sensitivity identified include: 1) the reliance on chemotherapy in the absence of non-chemotherapeutic control methods; 2) the repeated use of a single chemotherapeutant; 3) the short generation time of sea lice; 4) lack of toxicity of dichlorvos to early developmental stages of lice; and 5) sub-therapeutic dose rates. To ensure the long-term effectiveness of the limited number of available sea lice control products the following resistance management strategies are recommended: 1) chemotherapeutants be used as part of a well defined, documented, integrated pest management strategy that focus on minimising the use of chemotherapeutants; 2) co-ordinated monitoring and treatment efforts between farmers in common hydrographic regions; 3) compound selection that optimises efficacy; 4) treatment rotation; 5) accurate dosing; and 6) routine treatment evaluation and sensitivity testing."
http://www.ecoserve.ie/projects/sealice/abstract1.html

Fiona Lees, Mark Baillie, George Gettinby, Crawford W Revie
"BACKGROUND: Infestations of the parasitic copepod Lepeophtheirus salmonis, commonly referred to as sea lice, represent a major challenge to commercial salmon aquaculture. Dependence on a limited number of theraputants to control such infestations has led to concerns of reduced sensitivity in some sea lice populations. This study investigates trends in the efficacy of the in-feed treatment emamectin benzoate in Scotland, the active ingredient most widely used across all salmon producing regions. METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Study data were drawn from over 50 commercial Atlantic salmon farms on the west coast of Scotland between 2002 and 2006. An epi-informatics approach was adopted whereby available farm records, descriptive epidemiological summaries and statistical linear modelling methods were used to identify factors that significantly affect sea lice abundance following treatment with emamectin benzoate (SLICE(R), Schering Plough Animal Health). The results show that although sea lice infestations are reduced following the application of emamectin benzoate, not all treatments are effective. Specifically there is evidence of variation across geographical regions and a reduction in efficacy over time. CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE: Reduced sensitivity and potential resistance to currently available medicines are constant threats to maintaining control of sea lice populations on Atlantic salmon farms. There is a need for on-going monitoring of emamectin benzoate treatment efficacy together with reasons for any apparent reduction in performance. In addition, strategic rotation of medicines should be encouraged and empirical evidence for the benefit of such strategies more fully evaluated."
http://www.mendeley.com/research/th...ic-salmon-salmo-salar-l-in-scotland-20022006/

Christopher D. Todd
"Ectoparasitic copepods are major pathogens of farm and wild salmonids throughout the North Atlantic. Since the early 1990s, there has been controversy regarding the extent to which infective larvae of Lepeophtheirus salmonis originate from aquaculture sites and impact wild salmon (Salmo salar) and sea trout (Salmo trutta). Because of the impracticality of tracking individual planktonic larvae from hatching to final host colonization, reliance has been placed on non-genetic and genetic experimental approaches. Microsatellite analyses show that L. salmonis comprises a single panmictic population throughout the Atlantic; gene flow between parasites on wild and farmed hosts is sufficiently high to prevent population genetic differentiation by random drift. However, because of this lack of significant differentiation, no estimates of the levels of gene flow between farm and wild are possible. The possible evolution of resistance to chemotherapeutants by caligids is of especial concern to the aquaculture industry. Decreased efficacy has been reported for numerous compounds and identification of a point mutation of a sodium channel gene might be indicative of knockdown resistance to pyrethroids. An additional concern is that the more host generalist C. elongatus might become an especially severe pathogen to both salmonid and gadid host populations as the emerging cod (Gadus morhua) aquaculture industry develops."

Diane Morrison, Brad Boyce, Gerry Burry, Cilka LaTrace, Tiffany MacWilliam, Sonja Saksida
"Since 2000 SLICE(R) (Schering-Plough Animal Health) has been used exclusively to manage sea lice infestations of farmed salmon in British Columbia (BC). Some salmon farming regions outside of BC have reported resistance and treatment failures related to the use of this drug therapy. Data collected since 2003 by Marine Harvest Canada will be used to assess and discuss regional differences in sea lice infestation and treatment efficacy of SLICE(R).."
http://ocs.vre.upei.ca/index.php/FHS/FHS2008/paper/view/230

This is only a brief look at the issue.

4th - What the ecological significance of having a population of slice-resistant lice on farmed stock held in OPEN net-pens should be readily apparent - especially to you sockeyefry.

Means either the lice loads are difficult to manage, or you can't. The plan to delouse farmed stock BEFORE affecting outmigrating wild salmon smolts then fails, and this excess lice load gives excess lice to the wild stocks. Then these small smolts die, with associated population-level effect on adjacent wild salmon stocks.

Thats how "lice with resistance to slice affects wild stocks".

I fail to see how you don't get this sockeyefry - everyone else does but you - and I always considered you reasonably intelligent.

I also notice you have been very quiet after my last postings about integrated pest management issues, as well sockeyefry.

Instead you avoid the discussion about the real danger of slice-resistant lice, and instead go attack Alex's real and substantiated concerns.

I expected better from you.
 
quote: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...a-lice-data-to-be-made-public/article1485972/

Info to be released by gov't.
Click to expand...

Thanks Lazoman, this is good news. Seems like yet again, the people have to implore the courts to take govt. to task. Govt.'s role is to serve the people, not the corporations. Too bad the people have to go to court repeatedly to make this clear to govt.

As I said earlier, IMHO, more blind ($$$$) than stupid.

A quote from the Globe & Mail article;

quote:Mainstream, one of the fish farming companies that objected to the release of the information, argued that if environmental groups “are in possession of information that would suggest or confirm the presence of pathogens and/or sea lice in any quantity, and particularly in significant quantities, it is clear that they would use this information to damage Mainstream's business.”

Mainstream also argued critics could take the information out of context.
Click to expand...

Typical. Govt. should withhold info that could be used by independent researchers to protect the public resource in order to protect the $$$$ interests of industry. If info is taken out of context, then industry would have to put it back into context. Is that so difficult? This is the same specious bullsh!t that the tobacco industry used for half a century! Why do we continue to put up with this from govt. and industry using our waters?
 
Pretty unimpressive reply Sockeyefry!

Overtime I think you will begin to feel more and more like the old hacks that supported the tobacco industry did back when they and the tobaocco companies said that smoking wasn't hazardous to one's health. However, it's not to late to change your mind on this.

Long live wild salmon!!!
><))))>
 
So basically if I am understanding this right, anyone can make baseless accusations in the media and it is the person who is being accused responsibuility to prove their innocence? Hmmm this doesn't sound right? Isn't it innocent until PROVEN guilty?

Agent,

I realize that lice loads will increase on farmed fish without any controls. However, if lice loads are not controlled, then there will be no farms. If a farm cannot maintain the lice at smolt out migration below the perscribed legal max. limit, then the farm will be depopulated.

Biologically there is no risk to the wild smolt from a slice resistant lice. To them it is the same as a regular lice. It is the farmers who will be affected the most.

Every farmer on this coast is cocerned with the development of a resistant anything. Probably more than any of you or Morton.
 
quote:Originally posted by sockeyefry

So basically if I am understanding this right, anyone can make baseless accusations in the media and it is the person who is being accused responsibuility to prove their innocence? Hmmm this doesn't sound right? Isn't it innocent until PROVEN guilty?

Agent,

I realize that lice loads will increase on farmed fish without any controls. However, if lice loads are not controlled, then there will be no farms. If a farm cannot maintain the lice at smolt out migration below the perscribed legal max. limit, then the farm will be depopulated.

Biologically there is no risk to the wild smolt from a slice resistant lice. To them it is the same as a regular lice. It is the farmers who will be affected the most.

Every farmer on this coast is cocerned with the development of a resistant anything. Probably more than any of you or Morton.
Click to expand...
Don't go there! :(
 
quote:Originally posted by sockeyefry

So basically if I am understanding this right, anyone can make baseless accusations in the media and it is the person who is being accused responsibuility to prove their innocence? Hmmm this doesn't sound right? Isn't it innocent until PROVEN guilty?
Click to expand...
NO</u>, sockeyefry - we are referring to the precautionary principle - something we already talked about at length at:

http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8847

And which you responded to and obviously read already - so I can't understand why you don't understand now.

The most broadly accepted definition of the Precautionary Principle is Principle #15 of the June 1992, Declaration of the Rio Conference on Environment and Development, which reads:

“In order to protect the environment, the precautionary approach shall be widely applied by States according to their capabilities. Where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”

This definition of the precautionary principle is currently enshrined in the 1999 Canadian Environmental Protection Act (CEPA 1999):

“Whereas the Government of Canada is committed to implementing the precautionary principle that, where there are threats of serious or irreversible damage, lack of full scientific certainty shall not be used as a reason for postponing cost-effective measures to prevent environmental degradation.”

The precautionary principle has been incorporated into CEPA 1999 in the “Preamble”, “Administrative Duties” section and in the provisions with respect to controlling toxic substances. As one of the first countries in the world to implement the precautionary principle in its environmental legislation, Canada will also have to provide leadership and show innovation in determining how to apply the Principle and make it work.

In other words - it's up to ALL industries (including the open net-pen industry) to prove they are either:
1/ Not having any impacts, or
2/ If they are causing impacts, that they:
a/ change to stop those impacts, or
b/ get those impacts approved by DFO by
i) mitigating those impacts,
ii) compensating for those impacts.

Again, we already talked about at length at:

http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8847
quote:Originally posted by sockeyefry

Agent,

I realize that lice loads will increase on farmed fish without any controls. However, if lice loads are not controlled, then there will be no farms. If a farm cannot maintain the lice at smolt out migration below the perscribed legal max. limit, then the farm will be depopulated.

Biologically there is no risk to the wild smolt from a slice resistant lice. To them it is the same as a regular lice. It is the farmers who will be affected the most.

Every farmer on this coast is cocerned with the development of a resistant anything. Probably more than any of you or Morton.
Click to expand...
There is risk to wild smolts, though - sockeyefry. From increases in lice loading as mentioned.

Yes, I agree - fish farmers are (and should be) concerned about the development of slice resistance in their lice populations - just like Alex Morton.

It affects their profitability, and their product quality.

So, why does the government and industry lie about the issue then?
 
You have got to be kidding me.

A slice resistant population of sea lice has dramatic effects on wild stocks. If lice overloading is a problem that needs to be treated by the farm in the first place then that means more larvae in the water that will eventually effect generations of wild fish.

Sheer numbers of lice exploding as they never before have is the problem .Thats no accusation thats a fact.

Is it simply debate that entertains you or are you truly adament in the presevation of farms over our wild stocks?

Seems to me if you cared then the slightest question regarding practices would warrant your questions.


No?

I prefer to err on the side of caution with something so precious as our natural resources.

These fish have fed my family and well being. I owe wild fish my support!
 
I know we can probably state that we already beat this one to death - but I find the parallels interesting...:

------------------------------------------------------------------
Four Out Of Five Head Lice Resistant To Common Treatment
ScienceDaily (June 14, 2006) — Four out of five head lice are resistant to a common treatment used to eradicate them, finds a study of Welsh schoolchildren, published ahead of print in the Archives of Disease in Childhood.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

See Also:
Health & Medicine
Pharmacology
Accident and Trauma
Health Policy
Diseases and Conditions
Cancer
Chronic Illness
Reference
Louse
Crab louse
Lavender oil
Itch
The most common types of treatment for head lice in the UK are organophosphates (malathion) and pyrethroids (permethrin and phenothrin), which act directly on the insect's nervous system.

These are both available as over the counter preparations, with pyrethroids the most widely used, because they require shorter application time and have a less strong smell than malathion.

The authors used nit combs on a random sample of almost 300 000 primary schoolchildren at 31 schools spread across the five health authorities of Wales.

All lice collected as a result of the screen were tested for resistance to pyrethroids, including measuring increased amounts of enzymes, such as glutathione transferases, monooxygenases, or esterases.

Around 80% of 316 lice tested were resistant to the treatment, equating to resistance to four out of five head lice affecting primary schoolchildren in Wales, say the authors.

Whether this pattern is reflected elsewhere in the UK will depend on how head lice treatments are used, they add.

But they suggest that where resistance develops, a newer silicone based lotion might be a suitable alternative.

Email or share this story:| More
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Story Source:

Adapted from materials provided by BMJ Specialty Journals, via EurekAlert!, a service of AAAS.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Need to cite this story in your essay, paper, or report? Use one of the following formats:
APA

MLA BMJ Specialty Journals (2006, June 14). Four Out Of Five Head Lice Resistant To Common Treatment. ScienceDaily. Retrieved March 13, 2010, from http://www.sciencedaily.com­ /releases/2006/06/060614091416.htm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kaelc
Insurance or regs violation for accepting gas money
Replies
10
Views
1K
ab1752
ab1752
Squire
Abu Garcia Diplomat mooching rods
Replies
9
Views
546
Squire
Squire
InterMechanico
Will it work or will it kill me?
Replies
11
Views
1K
Chinookslayer
C
Salted
Straightwatch - Who are they really?
Replies
10
Views
1K
vicsurfer
vicsurfer
T
Howe Sound Prawn Closures
Replies
7
Views
1K
the grinch
T
Back
Top