Well done! My thoughts exactly but I would also have added a question to him:
'When those charged with ensuring the welfare of Pacific salmon (ie. Campbell & Harper) are finally 'charged' with accepting 'bribes' from the industry and therein, committing crimes against the environment, do you want your name attached to this list of those who 'slept' the Norwegians and turned their backs on our fish?
Here's where you can fill in the details.
He's responded yet again, this time to try and confuse me.
Thanks for sharing my thoughts with “tens of thousands of sportfishermen” in their exact context. Informed dialogue is very helpful. If aquaculture facilities are being asked to shut down their operations because they might spread a virus, then it is only prudent that any other activities that might spread the virus must also be shut down. To be clear, I was only offering a scenario, not a recommendation. Because of these potential implications, however, I hope that you will agree with me that we need to be very sure that ISAV positive PCR tests are confirmed, and we need to be very sure about whether what is being found is minor or major.
My next question to consider:
“On what basis are you concerned about ISAV in Pacific salmon?”
Here is the information that I use:
1. The first word of the title of Molly Kibenge’s draft manuscript regarding her ISAV PCR findings in BC Pacific salmon is “Asymptomatic” (= no disease). [Cohen Exhibit #]. It is quite common for fish (and people) to have virus but not have a disease.
2. When Dr. Kristi Miller reported ISAV positive PCR results in farmed Chinook salmon, she made it very clear that “There's no indication that it's causing disease” [December 15 Cohen transcripts, p. 53, lines 9 - 16]. I am the histopathologist that examined samples from the fish tested by Dr. Miller on the Creative salmon case, and I agree with Dr. Miller [see Cohen Exhibit # 2078]
3. Dr. Fred Kibenge isolated an eastern Canadian strain of ISAV from farmed coho salmon in Chile in 1999 (Kibenge et al. 2001), but the fish did not have clinical signs characteristic of ISA, and ISAV was not confirmed in the affected tissues; instead, the fish had a disease characterized by jaundice that continues to occur in Chile without any evidence of ISAV (Smith et al. 2006), supporting Dr. Kibenge’s conclusion that his ISAV findings in 1999 “might have been coincidental” (Cohen Exhibit #2086). The eastern Canadian strain of ISAV was never again found in Chile.
4. When Pacific salmon species were exposed to one of two strains of ISAV during controlled laboratory experiments, “No signs typical of ISA and no ISAV-related mortality occurred among any of the groups of Oncorhynchus spp. in either experiment (Rolland & Winton 2003).”
5. In 2008, the European strain of ISAV was widespread among farmed Atlantic salmon in Chile. Annual production of farmed coho salmon in Chile is greater than annual production of all species of farm salmon in BC. None of the Chilean coho salmon contracted ISA [December 19 Cohen transcripts, p. 53, lines 30 - 41].
The evidence in the peer-reviewed scientific literature and the Cohen Commission proceedings supports the conclusion that known and suspect strains of ISAV are not a major threat to wild Pacific salmon.
ISA is an Atlantic salmon disease, not a Pacific salmon disease. I remain confident that we do not have imported strains of ISAV in either our farmed Atlantic salmon or farmed/wild Pacific salmon. I am awaiting confirmatory evidence regarding some preliminary evidence that a native ISAV-like virus occurs in BC.
When VHSV (it causes a different OIE-reportable disease) was first isolated from hatcheries in the State of Washington in 1989, people were very concerned that it might be an imported strain. Today, however, we know that the 1989 finding was actually a native strain that is not a great concern to Pacific salmon species.
Sincerely,
Gary
-------------------------------------------------------------
Gary D. Marty, Fish Pathologist
Animal Health Centre
Ministry of Agriculture
1767 Angus Campbell Rd.
Abbotsford, BC, V3G 2M3
604-556-3123
Literature cited:
Kibenge FSB, Garate ON, Johnson G, Arriagada R, Kibenge MJT, Wadowska D (2001) Isolation and identification of infectious salmon anaemia virus (ISAV) from Coho salmon in Chile. Dis. Aquat. Org. 45:9-18
Rolland JB, Winton JR (2003) Relative resistance of Pacific salmon to infectious salmon anaemia virus. J. Fish Dis. 26:511-520
Smith PA, Larenas J, Contreras J, Cassigoli J, Venegas C, Rojas ME, Guajardo A, Perez S, Diaz S (2006) Infectious haemolytic anaemia causes jaundice outbreaks in seawater-cultured coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch (Walbaum), in Chile. J. Fish Dis. 29:709-715
My response to him was this.
Are you trying to say that ISAv cannot mutate and affect our wild salmon?
I am under the understanding and impression that just a few minor mutations would be all that is needed from all of my research. To me that is dangerous. I understand the needs for a food source, and export, but doing it the way it's currently being done is dangerous and playing with fire.
I believe fully to make 100% sure of this before a hindsight scenario happens, it to move the farms to land based containment. Even though ISAv may or may not be "killing" our fish yet, the potential for it to do so exists.
Another fishermen quoted in response to my previous letter that he would ask you the following question.
'When those charged with ensuring the welfare of Pacific salmon (ie. Campbell & Harper) are finally 'charged' with accepting 'bribes' from the industry and therein, committing crimes against the environment, do you want your name attached to this list of those who 'slept' the Norwegians and turned their backs on our fish?
Now. I'm not going to be extreme as in that comment, but I ask of you exactly what benefit besides purely financial there is to raising these fish in waters that are normally only inhabited by pacific salmon. If genetically they were designed by evolution to exist here they would already do so.
Dear minister, I do appreciate your time, but at the same time please consider all that we in BC want is the farms simply moved to land in closed containment to take out the "what if" and "potential threat"
We are not prepared to deal with a "we goofed" and "too late"
Raising Atlantic Salmon in Pacific farms is wrong no matter how one looks at it, and to be even potentially threatening to our fish is unexcusable.
As stated prior some things are worth more than money.
The opportunity to rectify the entire industry exists, and can be done, and this problem would vanish. If it's about money, the Govt, and Norweigan farms must spend it. Otherwise they can go home, and take their fish with them. Lifelong BC residents are no longer interested in excuses, and not willing to assume these risks for others to line their pockets with.
Regards once again.
