bigdogeh
Well-Known Member
Sorry, can't do it. Not when our wild pacific salmon are priceless....
Just the opinion of a good ol BC boy...
Fish Farm trouble in BC.
- Thread starter Chuck
- Start date
- Status
Just the opinion of a good ol BC boy...
Ouch - I had hoped that I would have been in your good books for not over stating the value of the salmon farming industry! LOL
GLG
Well-Known Member
So let me get this straight ..... We should be putting the dollar ahead of what the FN's want up in the Broughton Archipelago. Is that why you wanted to change the subject spopadyn? I get your not that concerned with the environment if the FF's can mitigate their damage. That is if they 1- willing to admit it, 2- put resources towards it but currently this seems to be not on their agenda. I would be interested what your view is because you seem to pointing us to..... we know what is best for FN.
This particular issue has been extensively discussed on this forum on numerous threads, spopadyn. If you are up for it search "Kristi Miller" and "muzzled" on this forum and Google - as well as "Molly Kibenge" and "ISA", and "Simon Jones" and "Cohen".
I am a bit confused what is being asked. I simply provided the facts that 78% of FF'ing is in partnership with First Nations. I also stated that at least 25% of all the direct employment is with First Nations. I challenged you that because one First Nation group opposes the FF's it doesn't mean all of them do.
If it serves my memory correctly, every single FN that was to be directly impacted by the Kitimat LNG deal signed on and approved it. All the opposition came from outside groups. Then the deal gets killed. There are still FN leaders lobbying to find a way to get this LNG project back on the rails. It was safe, needed and created a massive amount of economic activity. And, guess what, Canada is the last big nation with massive Natural Gas reserves that doesn't have an LNG pipeline or export system. We are out of this game - been lapped by the US, Australia etc....
I believe that if FF's have minimal (and that would be the best possible result) effect on our wild salmon stocks then they should be allowed to exist. If a FN has jurisdiction over an area and doesn't want them there, then they should have the right to have them moved when there permits expire. But, if the David Suzuki's of the world are up there using FN's as some kind of human shield to shut down FF's, all the while receiving donations and funding from the very people with a vested interest in shutting them down, well I do have a problem with that. I am hopeful that is not the case, but I never know.
Thanks - been reading on it - just trying to find the actual evidence that shows the "charter of rights" free speech violations. I have read a few of the opinion pieces, but it seems more like "how they felt" or "how they perceived the actions" etc. I will keep looking for that specific case of where the RCMP forcibly removed the documents and destroyed them so they couldn't be published. Anyway, for suppression of Free Speech, they all seem to have multiple articles about their work published across many media outlets. The government is either really bad at this suppression or it may be a bit of grandstanding on the part of the authors, or perhaps both.
I am guessing spopdyn - that you haven't been in the position of either Kristi or Fred or Molly - a career scientist who is intimidated and threatened if you are open and honest? Working in a department that has convinced itself at the upper echelon - that it's purpose is to promote rather than regulate - does not translate into an organization where one gets ahead by going against the flow, neither.
Well - if you look - you will find that evidence of collusion, intimidation, and dishonesty in both DFO and CFIA.
Well - if you look - you will find that evidence of collusion, intimidation, and dishonesty in both DFO and CFIA.
That is the debate - and as the independent science flows in - increasingly that answer is "NO".
bigdogeh
Well-Known Member
http://www.farmedanddangerous.org/salmon-farming-problems/first-nations/threats-food-fishery/
from this link:
The establishment of salmon farms on the BC coast has had a disastrous effect on First Nations’ traditional ways of life. Sea lice from salmon farms threaten the survival of entire wild salmon local populations,1 wild salmon that are integral to First Nation communities, their culture, tradition, economy and basic food needs.
“The Thompson Sound grizzlies are starving. Why? Because there are no salmon left for them. Salmon farming is having effects on land as well. The land and sea are very much a part of who we are as a people; if you allow this industry to destroy the food chain, you destroy a way of life we have depended on as coastal people.” – Brian Wadhams, Namgis Councillor and Director of the Board, Musgamagw Tsawataineuk Tribal Council.
Independent science has confirmed elevated levels of mercury in rockfish near salmon farms.2
It is well known that high amounts of mercury can damage the nervous system of people and animals. In the marine environment, mercury is usually found in the inorganic form. The mercury in lakes, streams and oceans can be transformed by bacteria to methyl mercury, an organic and more toxic form. Methyl mercury is the predominant form of mercury in fish and binds tightly to the proteins in fish tissue. Methyl mercury is of greater health significance because it is the form to which humans are primarily exposed when consuming fish as food.
Environmental and human health effects of mercury are a concern because mercury can accumulate in the fatty tissue of rockfish and people. Prolonged exposure to mercury damages the human nervous system.
Rockfish sampled within 750 metres of nine salmon farms, where native communities traditionally harvest seafood, had mercury levels ranging from 1.7 to 3.3 times higher than rockfish found over 3 km away from operating fish farms in the same area. As a result, Health Canada issued an advisory to children and women of child-bearing age to restrict their consumption of this food source.
Mercury builds up near salmon farms in fish feed and waste. It is also biologically more available underneath fish-pen nets where ocean sediments become depleted of oxygen.
Clam beaches near salmon farms are often covered with sludge and contaminated with decomposing fish feces and waste food from the farms, leaving the once pink and healthy clams black and inedible. Clams are a staple of the First Nations’ diet and coastal communities say it is getting harder to find good edible clams.
The Musgamagw Tsawataineuk People have inhabited the Broughton Archipelago for thousands of years and harvested clams for centuries. Now with the arrival of salmon farms, traditional gathering beaches are being contaminated due to farm waste, which includes chemicals and antibiotics.
Currently, there are 29 salmon farms in the Musgamagw Tsawataineuk people’s traditional territories, placed there without their informed consent or meaningful consultations.
The Musgamagw Tsawataineuk people are witnessing harmful changes in marine species since the introduction of salmon farms such as:
Lack of Consent – Farms In Traditional Territories
The majority of BC’s salmon farms are located in areas near or adjacent to First Nation communities in traditional territories that are important for groundfish, shellfish, salmon, herring, eulachon and other marine resources that aboriginal people rely on for food.
The practice of placing salmon farms in traditional territories without consultation or consent must stop. Impacts include:
1 Krkosek, M., M.A. Lewis, A. Morton, L.N. Frazer and J.P. Volpe. (2006) Epizootics of wild fish induced by farmed fish. Proceedings of the National Acadamy of Sciences of the USA. 103:15506-15510.
2 Adrian M.H. deBruyn, Marc Trudel, Nicola Eyding, Joel Harding, Heather McNally, Robert Mountain, Craig Orr, Diane Urban, Sergei Verenitch and Asit Mazumder.(2006). Ecosystemic Effects of Salmon Farming Increase Mercury Contamination in Wild Fish. Environmental Science and Technology. 40 (11): 3489-3493.
Morten, A. and R.D. Routledge (2005). Mortality rates for juvenile Pink Oncorhynchus gorbushca and Chum O. Keta salmon infested with sea lice Lepeophtherius salmonis in the broughton Archipelago. The Alaska Fisheries Research Bulletin. 11(2): 146-152.
from this link:
The establishment of salmon farms on the BC coast has had a disastrous effect on First Nations’ traditional ways of life. Sea lice from salmon farms threaten the survival of entire wild salmon local populations,1 wild salmon that are integral to First Nation communities, their culture, tradition, economy and basic food needs.
“The Thompson Sound grizzlies are starving. Why? Because there are no salmon left for them. Salmon farming is having effects on land as well. The land and sea are very much a part of who we are as a people; if you allow this industry to destroy the food chain, you destroy a way of life we have depended on as coastal people.” – Brian Wadhams, Namgis Councillor and Director of the Board, Musgamagw Tsawataineuk Tribal Council.
Independent science has confirmed elevated levels of mercury in rockfish near salmon farms.2
It is well known that high amounts of mercury can damage the nervous system of people and animals. In the marine environment, mercury is usually found in the inorganic form. The mercury in lakes, streams and oceans can be transformed by bacteria to methyl mercury, an organic and more toxic form. Methyl mercury is the predominant form of mercury in fish and binds tightly to the proteins in fish tissue. Methyl mercury is of greater health significance because it is the form to which humans are primarily exposed when consuming fish as food.
Environmental and human health effects of mercury are a concern because mercury can accumulate in the fatty tissue of rockfish and people. Prolonged exposure to mercury damages the human nervous system.
Rockfish sampled within 750 metres of nine salmon farms, where native communities traditionally harvest seafood, had mercury levels ranging from 1.7 to 3.3 times higher than rockfish found over 3 km away from operating fish farms in the same area. As a result, Health Canada issued an advisory to children and women of child-bearing age to restrict their consumption of this food source.
Mercury builds up near salmon farms in fish feed and waste. It is also biologically more available underneath fish-pen nets where ocean sediments become depleted of oxygen.
Clam beaches near salmon farms are often covered with sludge and contaminated with decomposing fish feces and waste food from the farms, leaving the once pink and healthy clams black and inedible. Clams are a staple of the First Nations’ diet and coastal communities say it is getting harder to find good edible clams.
The Musgamagw Tsawataineuk People have inhabited the Broughton Archipelago for thousands of years and harvested clams for centuries. Now with the arrival of salmon farms, traditional gathering beaches are being contaminated due to farm waste, which includes chemicals and antibiotics.
Currently, there are 29 salmon farms in the Musgamagw Tsawataineuk people’s traditional territories, placed there without their informed consent or meaningful consultations.
The Musgamagw Tsawataineuk people are witnessing harmful changes in marine species since the introduction of salmon farms such as:
- parasites, ulcers, and lesions on groundfish
- contaminated clam beds (less abundance and fewer healthy beaches)
- sea lice outbreaks on wild juvenile salmon
- collapse of some wild salmon runs exacerbated by sea lice epidemics
- seal, sea lion and sea bird deaths because they are seen as predators to the net cage fish farms
Lack of Consent – Farms In Traditional Territories
The majority of BC’s salmon farms are located in areas near or adjacent to First Nation communities in traditional territories that are important for groundfish, shellfish, salmon, herring, eulachon and other marine resources that aboriginal people rely on for food.
The practice of placing salmon farms in traditional territories without consultation or consent must stop. Impacts include:
- loss of and degradation of historical salmon runs
- further erosion of traditional ways of life and associated loss of culture
- short-term employment opportunities are overshadowed by long term loss of heritage
- Do not eat farmed salmon.
- Learn how you can get involved and make a difference.
- Make sure salmon is wild caught when ordering from restaurants or buying at the grocery store. Ask the server or clerk where the salmon came from and buy from sustainable supplies (check on-line sources for in-season sustainability rankings).
- Download the CAAR Factsheet: First Nations & Coastal Communities: Futures Threatened by Salmon Farms
- Download the CAAR brochure, Impacts of Salmon Farms on BC First Nations’ Traditional Food Sources
1 Krkosek, M., M.A. Lewis, A. Morton, L.N. Frazer and J.P. Volpe. (2006) Epizootics of wild fish induced by farmed fish. Proceedings of the National Acadamy of Sciences of the USA. 103:15506-15510.
2 Adrian M.H. deBruyn, Marc Trudel, Nicola Eyding, Joel Harding, Heather McNally, Robert Mountain, Craig Orr, Diane Urban, Sergei Verenitch and Asit Mazumder.(2006). Ecosystemic Effects of Salmon Farming Increase Mercury Contamination in Wild Fish. Environmental Science and Technology. 40 (11): 3489-3493.
Morten, A. and R.D. Routledge (2005). Mortality rates for juvenile Pink Oncorhynchus gorbushca and Chum O. Keta salmon infested with sea lice Lepeophtherius salmonis in the broughton Archipelago. The Alaska Fisheries Research Bulletin. 11(2): 146-152.
I haven't. But to somehow claim that these folks haven't been able to get the message out - well, the NY Times, Globe and Mail, Macleans magazine and CBC... I think they got there message out. I think the inference wasn't that the Government wanted to control messaging (this happens all the time and often it is for the good of our public) but that they were forbidden to publish scientific works. I am trying to see where a scientist had evidence or information that the government didn't allow to become public because it contradicted there stance. Trust me, this happens especially in the US. I will keep looking.....
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
So now we’re blaiming fish farms for the grizzle bear closures.
http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0180293
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Infection experiments with novel Piscine orthoreovirus from rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in salmonids
Helena Hauge1☯, Niccolo Vendramin2☯, Torunn Taksdal1, Anne Berit Olsen1,
Øystein Wessel3, Susie Sommer Mikkelsen2, Anna Luiza Farias Alencar2, Niels
Jørgen Olesen2, Maria Krudtaa Dahle1*
1 Norwegian Veterinary Institute, Oslo & Bergen, Norway, 2 National Veterinary Institute, Technical
University of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark, 3 Department of Food Safety and Infection Biology,
Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway
☯ These authors contributed equally to this work.
* maria.dahle@vetinst.no
Abstract
A new disease in farmed rainbow trout (Onchorhyncus mykiss) was described in Norway in 2013. The disease mainly affected the heart and resembled heart and skeletal muscle inflammation (HSMI) in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.). HSMI is associated with Piscine orthoreovirus (PRV), and a search for a similar virus in the diseased rainbow trout led to detection of a sequence with 85% similarity to PRV. This finding called for a targeted effort to assess the risk the new PRV-variant pose on farmed rainbow trout and Atlantic salmon by studying infection and disease pathogenesis, aiming to provide more diagnostic knowledge. Based on the genetic relationship to PRV, the novel virus is referred to as PRV-Oncorhynchus mykiss (PRV-Om) in contrast to PRV-Salmo salar (PRV-Ss). In experimental trials, intraperitoneally injected PRV-Om was shown to replicate in blood in both salmonid species, but more effectively in rainbow trout. In rainbow trout, the virus levels peaked in blood and heart of cohabitants 6 weeks post challenge, along with increased expression of antiviral genes (Mx and viperin) in the spleen, with 80±100% of the cohabitants infected. Heart inflammation was diagnosed in all cohabitants examined 8 weeks post challenge. In contrast, less than 50% of the Atlantic salmon cohabitants were infected between 8 and 16 weeks post challenge and the antiviral response in these fish was very low. From 12 weeks post challenge and onwards, mild focal myocarditis was demonstrated in a few virus-positive salmon. In conclusion, PRV-Om infects both salmonid species, but faster transmission, more notable antiviral response and more prominent heart pathology were observed in rainbow trout.
RESEARCH ARTICLE
Infection experiments with novel Piscine orthoreovirus from rainbow trout (Oncorhynchus mykiss) in salmonids
Helena Hauge1☯, Niccolo Vendramin2☯, Torunn Taksdal1, Anne Berit Olsen1,
Øystein Wessel3, Susie Sommer Mikkelsen2, Anna Luiza Farias Alencar2, Niels
Jørgen Olesen2, Maria Krudtaa Dahle1*
1 Norwegian Veterinary Institute, Oslo & Bergen, Norway, 2 National Veterinary Institute, Technical
University of Denmark, Copenhagen, Denmark, 3 Department of Food Safety and Infection Biology,
Norwegian University of Life Sciences, Oslo, Norway
☯ These authors contributed equally to this work.
* maria.dahle@vetinst.no
Abstract
A new disease in farmed rainbow trout (Onchorhyncus mykiss) was described in Norway in 2013. The disease mainly affected the heart and resembled heart and skeletal muscle inflammation (HSMI) in Atlantic salmon (Salmo salar L.). HSMI is associated with Piscine orthoreovirus (PRV), and a search for a similar virus in the diseased rainbow trout led to detection of a sequence with 85% similarity to PRV. This finding called for a targeted effort to assess the risk the new PRV-variant pose on farmed rainbow trout and Atlantic salmon by studying infection and disease pathogenesis, aiming to provide more diagnostic knowledge. Based on the genetic relationship to PRV, the novel virus is referred to as PRV-Oncorhynchus mykiss (PRV-Om) in contrast to PRV-Salmo salar (PRV-Ss). In experimental trials, intraperitoneally injected PRV-Om was shown to replicate in blood in both salmonid species, but more effectively in rainbow trout. In rainbow trout, the virus levels peaked in blood and heart of cohabitants 6 weeks post challenge, along with increased expression of antiviral genes (Mx and viperin) in the spleen, with 80±100% of the cohabitants infected. Heart inflammation was diagnosed in all cohabitants examined 8 weeks post challenge. In contrast, less than 50% of the Atlantic salmon cohabitants were infected between 8 and 16 weeks post challenge and the antiviral response in these fish was very low. From 12 weeks post challenge and onwards, mild focal myocarditis was demonstrated in a few virus-positive salmon. In conclusion, PRV-Om infects both salmonid species, but faster transmission, more notable antiviral response and more prominent heart pathology were observed in rainbow trout.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
So now we need to stop trout farms and stocking lakes? Have we determined that prv did not come from hatcheries or trout fish farms in lakes?
I'm pretty sure Federal scientists were not banned from publishing, ever, but were told by the Privy Council that speaking without going through the PMO's office was no longer allowed.
Thanks but you referencing yourself isn't quite the same thing. Look, I run a company and won't allow individuals in my company to issue press releases or speak with the media. That is not the same as an employee finds out we are selling poison and I hid this evidence. Can you supply me with the link to Molly Kibenge where she explictly says there was a cover up and that Dr. Simon Jones hid evidence? I can't find her saying that - I have found you saying that... I think you can appreciate that is a very different thing.
Sometimes they do spopadyn - if people go public and report it. I am sure we all realize there is a cost to doing so in any workplace. Whistleblowers are not usually slotted to proceed up in the ranks.
- Status
Similar threads
