The Harper government dismantled the Cohen website w all the exhibits, spopadyn - for the all too obvious reasons. I do have most of the pertinent exhibits saved, fortunately.
Fish Farm trouble in BC.
- Thread starter Chuck
- Start date
- Status
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
Have we determined that PRV was not spread or did not originate threw trout farms, hatcheries and stocking programs for rainbow trout, steelhead, coast cutthroat?
Alouette lake for example has quite a big trout farm in it, The same lake has sockeye smolts that are released into the alouette river.
bigdogeh
Well-Known Member
I never suggested that Molly wished to put herself in a vulnerable position by ignoring Simon's dissaproval. I also understand that (my perceptions here) you feel a need to defend Simon since you knew him personally.
However, as I previously wrote:
The only “not defensible” item in the discussion over hiding ISA results is the actions of our public officials. There are a number of key individuals in both CFIA and DFO that have totally forgotten who they are working for and what their priorities actually are suppossed to be. Their moral compass has veered due to the big steel boat of corporate greed coming alongside of DFO and CFIA.
IF Jones is an “excellent and responsible scientist” as you claim – then why isn't he an excellent and responsible public official as well? It certainly isn't because he was too dumb to figure-out the implications of what the confirmation of ISA would mean – quite the opposite.
Instead of protecting the trade of the open net-cage industry – DFO AND CFIA have legislated as a primary responsibility to protect Canada's resources – and specifically our fisheries resources for DFO - INSTEAD they promote and protect the open net-pen industry. It's a huge conflict of interest, as Cohen and others pointed-out.
In addition, as proven and dictated by many, successive court decisions: ALL federal and Provincial departments, agencies and representatives have the legal obligation (a fiducary duty) to consult, co-manage and accommodate First Nations and their needs and concerns when managing public resources. The degree of the consultation depends upon the degree of potential infringement. It is up to our government officials (each and everyone, including Jones) to identify potential infringements and consult with FN.
Infecting wild stocks (such as Cultus Lake – now on the SARA lists) with ISA would constitute such an infringement and trigger the need for deep consultation with any infringed FN Bands. Certainly, the investigation of a potential release of ISA into a naive population with the potential for severe population-level impacts would be of paramount importance and priority.
So, as Molly's boss - did Jones get hold of the infringed FN IMMEDIATELY and do follow-up studies including getting fresh samples to retest Cultus Lake stocks after Molly's findings?
No, he did not. Instead he apparently blocked Molly from publishing, and when asked specifically and legally by Cohen to provide all documents about ISA, somehow he apparently forgot about Molly's research - research he would have been intimately familiar with - research a responsible and accountable public official would not hide.
How can you legally, honestly and morally defend these actions? Would you define these actions as: “excellent and responsible"?
MANY peer-reviewed studies are still written and published even when they include conflicting and/or unconfirmed results. Sometimes these results are then termed "preliminary". Most reports then recommend further studies in their discussion and Recommendations section.
I see no reason to squish and hide Molly's report over the science.
Oh wait – maybe this ISA fiasco is not about science or protecting public resources – but rather about keeping BC farmed salmon certified ISA-free so the industry can sell farmed fish to export markets - thereby protecting the open net-cage industry -that would be the real reason Molly's results were hidden.
I demand openess and transparency from my public officals, especially when they are dealing with our public resources. Screw Harper and the PMO. Screw the CFIA and their attempt to intimidate Kibenge and his lab. We need openess and transparency more now than ever - it's something called democracy - something our grandfathers died for.
Like others on this forum - I am outraged (but not shocked) over the degree of collusion I see in the government and its' officials - and I'm not putting-up with it anymore.
However, as I previously wrote:
The only “not defensible” item in the discussion over hiding ISA results is the actions of our public officials. There are a number of key individuals in both CFIA and DFO that have totally forgotten who they are working for and what their priorities actually are suppossed to be. Their moral compass has veered due to the big steel boat of corporate greed coming alongside of DFO and CFIA.
IF Jones is an “excellent and responsible scientist” as you claim – then why isn't he an excellent and responsible public official as well? It certainly isn't because he was too dumb to figure-out the implications of what the confirmation of ISA would mean – quite the opposite.
Instead of protecting the trade of the open net-cage industry – DFO AND CFIA have legislated as a primary responsibility to protect Canada's resources – and specifically our fisheries resources for DFO - INSTEAD they promote and protect the open net-pen industry. It's a huge conflict of interest, as Cohen and others pointed-out.
In addition, as proven and dictated by many, successive court decisions: ALL federal and Provincial departments, agencies and representatives have the legal obligation (a fiducary duty) to consult, co-manage and accommodate First Nations and their needs and concerns when managing public resources. The degree of the consultation depends upon the degree of potential infringement. It is up to our government officials (each and everyone, including Jones) to identify potential infringements and consult with FN.
Infecting wild stocks (such as Cultus Lake – now on the SARA lists) with ISA would constitute such an infringement and trigger the need for deep consultation with any infringed FN Bands. Certainly, the investigation of a potential release of ISA into a naive population with the potential for severe population-level impacts would be of paramount importance and priority.
So, as Molly's boss - did Jones get hold of the infringed FN IMMEDIATELY and do follow-up studies including getting fresh samples to retest Cultus Lake stocks after Molly's findings?
No, he did not. Instead he apparently blocked Molly from publishing, and when asked specifically and legally by Cohen to provide all documents about ISA, somehow he apparently forgot about Molly's research - research he would have been intimately familiar with - research a responsible and accountable public official would not hide.
How can you legally, honestly and morally defend these actions? Would you define these actions as: “excellent and responsible"?
MANY peer-reviewed studies are still written and published even when they include conflicting and/or unconfirmed results. Sometimes these results are then termed "preliminary". Most reports then recommend further studies in their discussion and Recommendations section.
I see no reason to squish and hide Molly's report over the science.
Oh wait – maybe this ISA fiasco is not about science or protecting public resources – but rather about keeping BC farmed salmon certified ISA-free so the industry can sell farmed fish to export markets - thereby protecting the open net-cage industry -that would be the real reason Molly's results were hidden.
I demand openess and transparency from my public officals, especially when they are dealing with our public resources. Screw Harper and the PMO. Screw the CFIA and their attempt to intimidate Kibenge and his lab. We need openess and transparency more now than ever - it's something called democracy - something our grandfathers died for.
Like others on this forum - I am outraged (but not shocked) over the degree of collusion I see in the government and its' officials - and I'm not putting-up with it anymore.
wildmanyeah
Crew Member
This is why Trump got elected complete contemptment for government institutions and "draining the swamp"
Fishmyster
Well-Known Member
This might seem like a stupid question to some but I will ask it anyway.
How is it that ISA in Cultas sockeye was coming from farm fish? Could it not be that Cultas lake has been contaminated and those fish have extremely low immunities? Is it possible the virus is propagating in this run of salmon because they are the most accommodating population?
How is it that ISA in Cultas sockeye was coming from farm fish? Could it not be that Cultas lake has been contaminated and those fish have extremely low immunities? Is it possible the virus is propagating in this run of salmon because they are the most accommodating population?
But, you are stating that people who have been interviewed by several media outlets have also made claims of this. I am just asking for that link so I can read what thse people say, not what you interpret as them saying.
Okay again this is why things keep going off the rails. First off, the assertion that this information was suppressed is in fact False. It is all in this report. There is no cover up because it was reported and acted upon. In fact, the initial findings of Molly Kibenge were retested by Frederick Kibenge her husband. In the blind tests, he was not able to replicate her results and produced as many false positives as confirmatory tests. Then, because the information is so lacking in statistical correlation, they sent samples to a third lab and get zero positive tests. They also retest them 7 years later, and again get no positives. What the hell? Now I know why she hasn't publicly stated there was a cover up or suppression, her own husband was unable to confirm her initial findings. AA, this was great that you supplied this to the forum. I will read it all but I am surprised at the conclusions you anti-FF's have made from this document. I can also assure you, as a physicist, cold fusion does not exist - this is also not a cover up by the energy industry. The experiments trumpeted by Fleishman-Pons were never repeatable despite thousands of universities attempting the experiment.
cuttlefish
Well-Known Member
Hey, getting back on topic, I found a link to the paper that pegged overall PRv prevalence in Washington and Alaska salmon species at 3.7%. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/29159930. This is not the paper referrenced in the BCSFA press release (see Dave's post #813) but it does match one of their Key Facts. Their referrence was to a paper, Gustafson, et al. still in press, that examined ISAv prelalence in salmon stocks from tje same area.
Reading through the paper I took note of Figure 1 that showed zero prevalence of PRv in the sockeye salmon samples tested. Zeeeero. An interesting comparison to PRv prevalence in found in BC sockeye salmon in the Morton, et al. 2017 paper.
I'm still looking for that Garver, et al. paper referenced by BCSFA that examined fitness of PRv infected wild BC salmon.
Reading through the paper I took note of Figure 1 that showed zero prevalence of PRv in the sockeye salmon samples tested. Zeeeero. An interesting comparison to PRv prevalence in found in BC sockeye salmon in the Morton, et al. 2017 paper.
I'm still looking for that Garver, et al. paper referenced by BCSFA that examined fitness of PRv infected wild BC salmon.
Do you have an article from Fred Kibenge disputing that his test results were what was reported? Are the veracity of what his lab results produced in question? I can't find that so I suspect that if he and his wife wrote a book together, there might be a whole chapter on how he had to sleep on the couch for a month because he couldn't corroborate her lab tests.
Fishmyster
Well-Known Member
Possibly diseases are more common in wild fish than we want to believe and there is more transfer from wild to farmed/hatchery then farmed to wild!!
Well, thank god we live in Canada. We seem to have all the information at our finger tips along with a significant portion of fake-info at our finger tips. AA, have you actually read the report you provided a link to? Can you site one spot in said report where the conclusion was wrong? And by wrong, I mean scientifically wrong - not your gut instinct wrong. Again, I read these wild accusations and you anti-FF folks supply all the information that actually contradicts your accusations. I would caution heavily about accusing scientists of hiding, covering up, colluding etc. This becomes defamatory and many people on anonymous stock watch forums have been found guilty of defamation ( and it has cost people lots of money). I think when you say you demand openness and transparency, I fear you are falling into the trap of having an answer before the facts come in, then deciding that the science is faulty if it doesn't support your hypothesis.
How about I don't recall, I can't remember or I Forgot?
SpringFever552
Well-Known Member
Now thats funny^^^^
?? - not sure what your post means. Would love to make a joke here but would probably get banned so maybe I will ask you to clarify.
- Status
Similar threads
