fish farm siting criteria & politics

[rln]

agentaqua
your post above sure shows a reason for anyone that likes to or is connected to sportfishing in any sort of way should meet with their already elected MLA and those that are running against them before the next election to see where they personally stand on this issue. It's time for a change in the aqua culture idustry and we can all make it happen this coming May 12 if we so chose to do so.

 

[rln]

agentaqua
your post above sure shows a reason for anyone that likes to or is connected to sportfishing in any sort of way should meet with their already elected MLA and those that are running against them before the next election to see where they personally stand on this issue. It's time for a change in the aqua culture idustry and we can all make it happen this coming May 12 if we so chose to do so.

 

[Little Hawk]

Howdy,

Still trying to chew my way through the PSF report.
One thing has to remain clear here: Regardless how many others had input into the paper, Fraser had the last word on what gets printed and he will never say or do anything to offend the Party Faithful.

Thus far, my main bone-of-contention is the statement that Wild Salmon and Aquaculture can co-exist.

This statement is problematic for two reasons:

1) Wild Salmon can not co-exist with open net pens.
2) The industry will not embrace closed-containment.
(They'll simply pack-up and expand the Chilean operation)

In the end, I don't think any of us should be overly optimistic about this report spawning any fruitful initiatives to deal with the salmon-farming menace. Look what happened after the Legatt Report, the NDP scoffed at it and lifted the moratorium on expansion of the industry.
(A preemptive-strike on Wordbender is in order here: Regardless that the NDP is equally responsible for dealing us into this fishfarming mess, I'm remain adamant about voting Campbell out of office to send a succinct message to ALL future politicians - STOP MESSING WITH PACIFIC SALMON!)

A word of praise for Agent: Regardless that I joined this forum less than 2 yrs ago, I have managed to make something of a 'splash' over the fish-farming scam. You, however, with your perseverance, tenacity, and sublime knowledge of the problems with this industry have elevated SFBC Members knowledge and participation in the opposition to this industry to a whole new level!

For that, Sir, and on behalf of Wild Pacific Salmon and all creatures that depend on them, I thank you.

Please keep up the good work.

Standing for Wild Salmon,

Terry Anderson

Wild Salmon Alliance

 

[Little Hawk]

Howdy,

Still trying to chew my way through the PSF report.
One thing has to remain clear here: Regardless how many others had input into the paper, Fraser had the last word on what gets printed and he will never say or do anything to offend the Party Faithful.

Thus far, my main bone-of-contention is the statement that Wild Salmon and Aquaculture can co-exist.

This statement is problematic for two reasons:

1) Wild Salmon can not co-exist with open net pens.
2) The industry will not embrace closed-containment.
(They'll simply pack-up and expand the Chilean operation)

In the end, I don't think any of us should be overly optimistic about this report spawning any fruitful initiatives to deal with the salmon-farming menace. Look what happened after the Legatt Report, the NDP scoffed at it and lifted the moratorium on expansion of the industry.
(A preemptive-strike on Wordbender is in order here: Regardless that the NDP is equally responsible for dealing us into this fishfarming mess, I'm remain adamant about voting Campbell out of office to send a succinct message to ALL future politicians - STOP MESSING WITH PACIFIC SALMON!)

A word of praise for Agent: Regardless that I joined this forum less than 2 yrs ago, I have managed to make something of a 'splash' over the fish-farming scam. You, however, with your perseverance, tenacity, and sublime knowledge of the problems with this industry have elevated SFBC Members knowledge and participation in the opposition to this industry to a whole new level!

For that, Sir, and on behalf of Wild Pacific Salmon and all creatures that depend on them, I thank you.

Please keep up the good work.

Standing for Wild Salmon,

Terry Anderson

Wild Salmon Alliance

 

[sockeyefry]

Hey Wolf.

No I am not saying anything about you being dishonest. I am trying to indicate that the person you are getting the info from maybe exagerrating to make a story better that is all.

 

[gimp]

peace out fri-farmer check the news

 

[agentaqua]

One for the wild salmon - BC Supreme Court delivers ruling in fish farming case</u>
Feb 9th, 2009 4:27 PM
Media Release
Attn: Wildlife/Environment/Legal/Political/News Reporters and Editors

ONE FOR THE WILD SALMON!

Vancouver, B.C., February 9, 2009 - Today BC Supreme Court ruled that the BC government does not have the right to regulate salmon farms - the BC regulation of fish farms has become unlawful, unconstitutional and invalid. The fish inside the farm are now considered a fishery, not agriculture and thus the federal government has exclusive right to regulation. The court suspended the ruling for a period of 12 months to allow the federal government to bring in proper legislation.

On September 29 - October 3, 2008, the case Alexandra Morton et al vs the A.G. of British Columbia and Marine Harvest Canada, Vancouver Registry, No. S083198 was argued in BC Supreme Court before Mr. Justice Hinkson. Filed under the Judicial Review Procedure Act, RSBC, c. 241 the Petitioners sought a declaration that the statutory provisions of British Columbia's Aquaculture Regulatory Regime - sections 13(5) and 26(2)(a) of the Fisheries Act (B.C.) - be declared unconstitutional and of no force or effect by virtue of section 52 of the Constitution, which states that the regulation of Canada's fisheries is under the sole jurisdiction of the Federal Crown and cannot be delegated to the provinces.

When salmon farming arrived on this coast very little was know about it, today know much, much more. Just last week the provincially funded Pacific Salmon Forum called for restructioning of the fish farm regulatory regime now we have the opportunity to do something that makes sense.

The response from Alexandra Morton, lead petitioner in the case, is one of relief and joy. "Finally, the government agency in charge of fish farms is mandated to put wild salmon first. This has come none too soon as provincial management of fish farms is devastating many coastal communities."

"Because the province is not responsible for the oceans, the impact of fish farms on the oceans became nobody's business and this is how we got into this mess," explains Morton.

"The B.C. salmon farming industry is largely foreign and facing severe global economic and disease problems," says Morton. "What makes countries wealthy is their resources and wild salmon are an extremely valuable fishery to the benefit of the BC economy."

"I would like to thank my lawyer, Greg McDade, the hundreds of people who supported this via www.adopt-a-fry.org", says Morton, "West Coast Environmental Law and many others for their help. There is an enormous amount of work ahead, but this court has illuminated a path though the chaos. The war in the water should be over. Our wild salmon are down but they are not out!"

- 30 -

For further information, and to schedule interviews, please contact:

Alexandra Morton - 250-974 -7086
Brian Gunn, BC Wilderness Tourism Association - 250-203-3045
Greg McDade - 604-988-5201


Citation: British Columbia (Agriculture and Lands), 2009 BCSC 136
Date: 20090209
Docket: S083198
Registry: Vancouver
http://www.huffstrategy.com/MediaMa...upreme-Court-delivers-ruling-in-fis/1521.html

 

[wolf]

not a chance

quote:No I am not saying anything about you being dishonest. I am trying to indicate that the person you are getting the info from maybe exagerrating to make a story better that is all.

I trust this guy with my life and have been friends with him for over 15 years and hes as honest as anybody can be he is working to work!!!! enough

Wolf

 

[agentaqua]

thanks for the kind words, Little Hawk

 

[Gunsmith]

Sockeyefry I may have a lot learn about this subject but I do some research and the internet is available to all. The problem I have with you is all I have seen is support for the fish farms with out any backing. You seem to have a lot to say to those who do not want fish farms but provide no references. Show your proof or shut up. These forums are for sportsmen who want to pass this enjoyment on to their descendants and not show them at fish farms what a salmon might have looked like.

 

[Little Hawk]

Howdy,

I received this email from WSA member Steve Lawson who is doing some great work out Tofino way. Many of us here on the South Island are aware that the Fraser and Cowichan Chinook are struggling. Additionally, Clayoquot Chinook are also in big trouble. Read Steve's letter to Mark Hume (Globe & Mail) outlining how the local fish farms are doing all they can to help this once magnificent run of beleagered Chinook on the road to recovery...


Hello Mark, we are working with the Wild Fish Conservancy (from the US) on research regarding sea lice here in Clayoquot Sound. We also have a DFO permit to do sea lice research as well here, particularly in Bedwell Inlet where there are 7 or more farms that salmon fry have to negotiate to get to the open ocean when migrating out this spring. All of these farms are using "grow lights" to make the Atlantic salmon in the pens grow faster, feeding all the time, 24/7. There are generally 6 large 1000 watt bulbs (see picture) in each net pen, and generally 10 to 14 net pens per farm. This means that right now there are approximately more than 500 of these lights on underwater in Bedwell Inlet alone, much less throughout Clayoquot Sound where there are 24 fish farms. According to federal regulations regarding fishing, no commercial fishermen are allowed to use lights to catch fish as it is a well known fact that lights attract fish artificially. We have studies recently released showing that herring and other smaller fish, as well as predators are attracted to the lights. We can send you the study if you like. These open net pens allow smaller fish to swim in and out of them, therefore causing wild fish to become food for either Atlantic fish in the farms or sea lice that are abundant in and around the farms. We work with the Clayoquot UNESCO Biosphere Marine and Aquatic Committee and have put thousands of dollars into trying to save the collapsing wild salmon stocks in Clayoquot Sound, particularly in the Bedwell Inlet where the Clayoquot Wilderness Resort (wildretreat.com) has put in spawning channels (at considerable effort, time and cost). If there was any accountability or good faith by industry or DFO, these artificial lights could be turned off with the flick of a switch, which might just give some of the small fish in these inlets the chance of surviving. At this time, there are wild Chinook salmon smolts hatching out at the Tofino Salmon Enhancement Society Hatchery that came out of Bedwell Inlet stock, in a last ditch attempt to try to save this species from crashing, there were barely enough salmon to be able to take one for eggs this year. These salmonids will be released into the Bedwell River and spawning channels this spring in the hopes that some will survive. As it is, we are concerned that these fish will become food for either Atlantic Salmon or sea lice en route out as these lights are on now and stay on until June, the out migration begins soon and will continue until June. We can take you out or perhaps you can go with the Wild Fish Conservancy on their research boats . We will, as First Nations Environmental Network, be officially asking DFO, industry and the Provincial Government to put out these lights now and First Nations from Ahousaht are in talks with Mainstream regarding this. It is hard to get good photographic evidence with photos from the air at night but we do have access to float planes, we have personally seen and photographed the lights at twilight but they are hard to show up at that time. Anyway, in the interest of wild salmon conservation, these lights need to be put out now. All the best to you, Susanne and Steve Lawson

 

[agentaqua]

quote:Originally posted by Little Hawk

Howdy,


...Hello Mark, we are working with the Wild Fish Conservancy (from the US) on research regarding sea lice here in Clayoquot Sound. We also have a DFO permit to do sea lice research as well here, particularly in Bedwell Inlet where there are 7 or more farms that salmon fry have to negotiate to get to the open ocean when migrating out this spring. All of these farms are using "grow lights" to make the Atlantic salmon in the pens grow faster, feeding all the time, 24/7. There are generally 6 large 1000 watt bulbs (see picture) in each net pen, and generally 10 to 14 net pens per farm. This means that right now there are approximately more than 500 of these lights on underwater in Bedwell Inlet alone, much less throughout Clayoquot Sound where there are 24 fish farms. According to federal regulations regarding fishing, no commercial fishermen are allowed to use lights to catch fish as it is a well known fact that lights attract fish artificially. We have studies recently released showing that herring and other smaller fish, as well as predators are attracted to the lights. We can send you the study if you like. ...

Little Hawk - is there a web link to that report? many of us would be interested in reading it.

 

[sockeyefry]

Hey Gunsmith

You may not have noticed, but most of what is published on this forum, with the exception of a few references to actual scientific studies are some one else's opinion, with no references or proof. For example, look at Little Hawks last post. This is just someones opinion. Who are the Lawsons? What peer review has their submission to MR. Hume gone through. What proof do they have of the effects they claim. Where is the research? Sorry, but this is just their opinion presented by LH. How come you are not asking Little Hawk to "Shut Up"? I'll ansswer for you: It's cause you agree with him. That is a double standard, and is what all hypocrits are famous for.

In addition, when I signed up for this forum, I didn't see the criteria for memebership as you have stated it.

 

[fish4all]

quote:Originally posted by sockeyefry

Hey Gunsmith

You may not have noticed, but most of what is published on this forum, with the exception of a few references to actual scientific studies are some one else's opinion, with no references or proof. For example, look at Little Hawks last post. This is just someones opinion. Who are the Lawsons? What peer review has their submission to MR. Hume gone through. What proof do they have of the effects they claim. Where is the research? Sorry, but this is just their opinion presented by LH. How come you are not asking Little Hawk to "Shut Up"? I'll ansswer for you: It's cause you agree with him. That is a double standard, and is what all hypocrits are famous for.

In addition, when I signed up for this forum, I didn't see the criteria for memebership as you have stated it.

Fry;

I don't always see eye to eye with some of the people on this form but when it comes to leaving the lights on, that's just wrong. I've worked and lived on the ocean my entire life. Anybody that has been around a marina at night or on the ocean knows that lights attract fish. You don't need reasearch to prove that.

It is very appartent that the farms (that are backed by Norway) are having some negitive effects on wild stocks. Weather it be lice, crap, lights....ect. To try to say they don't is foolish.

Put them on the beach then there is no arguement.

 

[Gunsmith]

I think sockeye is like a tele-marketer he doesn,t understand the meaning of no, or in other words know?

 

[Little Hawk]

Agent,

PM me and I'll send you Lawson's email address.
He and Susanne would be happy to help.

Cheers,
Terry

silversaw@telus.net

 

[sockeyefry]

fish4all,

I wasn't disagreeing with the assertion that the lights may have a negative effect. What I was responding to was Gunsmith's double standard.

Yes, I agree the lights do attract fish, as anyone who hangs around a marina knows. But if we allow lighting on other structures in or around the water, then we must permit all lighting. In addition, the lighting on water attracts prey species, which in turn are preyed upon. Lighting, like structure and nutrients actually have a positive effect on aquatic ecosystems provided they are not excessive. There was a study done in Puget sound which concluded that fish farms were actually good for the environment, there was also another study done in DScotland where they found that there was a "zone of enrichment" surrounding salmon farms, in which they found an abundance of sea life, in excess of levels farther from the farms. It seemed that the presence of the farm created an oasis in a desert so to speak. However I cannot find either link. I will try to get it however. Maybe Agent Aqua could help out, as he seems to have info at his finger tips. Probably not though as this may actually show something good about the farms, and we wouldn't want that would we?

 

[agentaqua]

quote:Originally posted by agentaqua

Originally posted by sockeyefry

fish4all,
...
Yes, I agree the lights do attract fish, as anyone who hangs around a marina knows. But if we allow lighting on other structures in or around the water, then we must permit all lighting. ...

Come-on sockeyefry. let's be honest on the differences here, okay?

Wharves may have a few predators around that would take smolts. Maybe less than a dozen staghorn sculpins, and the odd kelp greenling. I know I have swam around enough of them. And maybe the odd blue heron that squawks and flies away when anyone approaches it.

The large flush of smolts outmigrating in the spring easily overwhelm these available predators.

IN CONTRAST TO THIS REALITY - A single fish farm has something like 600,000 to maybe 2 MILLION Atlantic salmon that love to try to eat anything silver - especially any herring or pink smolts. And there's something like 27-ish of these farms on smolt migratiion routes in the Broughton, alone.

So, let's be honest about potential for population-level impacts, okay? You could easily compare biomass of available predators between the 2 scenarios, which would work-out to be something like 10s of kgs of predators (the wharf) to MILLIONS of kgs of predators in the salmon pens. A difference of 5-6 digits - that's MILLIONS of times more in the salmon pens.

Now which one of these scenarios would have the single largest population-level effect on migrating pink smolts by attracting this prey (using lights) to the available predators?

What do you think?

 

[Gunsmith]

Hey sockeye isn't that the kettle calling the frying pan grimy butt by saying I have double standards when you say you are involved in salmonid enhancement and yet you embrace salmon farming like a long lost cousin.
Take your head out of the sand! Salmon farming is with atlantic salmon that is being raised in pacific salmon waters. Nothing wrong with that? Get out of here you are the biggest hypocrite of all.

 

[Gunsmith]

By the way sockeye there is also a zone of enrichment downstream of any sewage outlet.