Sea Lice and Fraser Sockeye — Be Afraid!

O

OneWay

Guest
Sea lice spread to British Columbia’s most lucrative fish stocks

Campbell River Salmon and Herring worth nearly $80 million to province last year


Echo Bay, British Columbia, March 31, 2008 - The latest scientific paper on sea lice reports that infestations have spread to juvenile pink, chum, and sockeye salmon as well as juvenile herring near Campbell River fish farms. The study was published online by the North American Journal of Fisheries Management.

The Campbell River area is known as the Salmon Capital of the World, and accounts for a large portion of the $233 million a year in sport fishing tourism that the British Columbian government collects.

Alexandra Morton R.P.Bio. (Salmon Coast Field Station), Dr. Richard Routledge (Simon Fraser University) and Dr. Martin Krkosek (University of Alberta) looked at 4,700 young wild salmon near and distant to fish farms in 2005 and 2006 throughout the Discovery Islands.

“We found four times as many wild juvenile salmon were infected with sea lice near fish farms than distant from the farms,” says Alexandra Morton. “Then in 2006 when most of the farms were empty, the sea lice declined”.

“This is the same pattern we see in the Broughton Archipelago,” added Dr. Routledge, "Where there are farm fish the young wild salmon are infested with lice. Remove the farm fish and the sea lice problem disappears.”

The study looked at other variables, including salinity and temperature, but found that farm fish were the only significant factor contributing to the infestations.

The study was made possible through the dedication of several commercial fishermen who did the sampling.

Pink and chum salmon were the primary study focus, but juvenile herring were also examined and found infested with lice. The herring were tiny and still lacking scales suggesting high vulnerability. This is the first report of sea lice on herring this young.

In addition, juvenile sockeye were discovered to be infested near the farms. Last summer, commercial salmon fishing was closed on the south coast because so many of the Fraser River sockeye failed to come home. Some of the sockeye that went “missing” last year were likely infested with sea lice in 2005 when they migrated to sea.

“We did not test the DNA of the sockeye we examined,” explains Dr. Martin Krkosek. “However, we know that many Fraser River sockeye migrate through our study area.”

The report concludes there is urgent need to implement policy that protects wild salmon from farm fish.

Currently Minister Pat Bell has called for more drug use to control lice. But Morton disagrees, saying that using drugs creates concerns for environmental and human health. The drug (Slice) has not been approved for use by Health Canada and may impact important stocks of crab, shrimp, and prawns.

Morton concluded: “The only measure that is going to work is separating the farm and wild salmon. This can only be achieved by completely closed containment technology or moving the farms. If nothing is done now, I worry that Canadian salmon stocks will suffer the same fate as European salmon stocks that have declined dramatically in fish farming regions.

*To review the scientific paper, visit http://afs.allenpress.com/perlserv/?request=get-document&doi=10.1577/M07-042.1
-30-
For more information, or to arrange an interview, contact:

Alexandra Morton 250-949-1664 wildorca@island.net
Richard Routledge (in the field) routledg@stat.sfu.ca and Skype at rick.routledge
 
"Some of the sockeye that went “missing” last year were likely infested with sea lice in 2005 when they migrated to sea."

Ha.. thats quite the assumption to make.. may forget to mention, direct commercial fishing alaska, hake/pollock bycatch, the salmon shark epidemic in alaska, reduced ocean productivity, super warm temps in the fraser, excessive irrigation everywhere, droughts, gravel harvesting, habitat destruction, parasites, i can go on....

not that im a salmon farm lover but statements like that **** me off
 
Statements like that are understandable in this situation. When one puts in as many hours as those people mentioned, I think they are able to make reasonable conclusions from the experience their hands on research shows them...What really pisses me off are the government officials who pretend to know what they're talking about and quote their own stats to refute solid evidence to the contrary.
I'm begining to wonder if some of our government members even know what end of the fish has the tail or head...:(
I'd laugh if it wasn't so serious and sad...[}:)]
 
Start sending letters and e-mails to our premier (gordon.campbell.mla@leg.bc.ca )and to Pat Bell ( pat.bell.mla@leg.bc.ca) Voice your concerns...tell them what you'll be voting if something isn't done before our last wild BC salmon dies.
 
quote:Originally posted by abbyfireguy

Statements like that are understandable in this situation. When one puts in as many hours as those people mentioned, I think they are able to make reasonable conclusions from the experience their hands on research shows them...[}:)]

Alexandra Morton is not a researcher. Shes a rich American who has been trying to get at salmon farms for 15 years. Sea lice got traction because she got funding from Alaska to demarket their competition: BC farm salmon. Her research is pathetic and panned by world experts. DFO studies are massive in scope, sophisticated and done by world fisheries experts who have been on staff for 3 decades and have nothing to gain by lying. Morton and her ilk spend more $$ on news releases than research. Most of their "science" is based on computer models. Guess what computer models funded by Alaska have to say about Sea Lice- of course it says they are the cause. Meanwhile the real criminals- those that club wild salmon to death for fun and profit get away with murder.
 
You know handee, if you have nothing else to contribute but this crap why don't you just go somewhere else and spread your hollow nonsense, hu? Here are concerned salmon friends who actually care for what the future of our salmon looks like. We are not interested in your weird mental state of condition.
 
quote:Originally posted by chris73

You know handee, if you have nothing else to contribute but this crap why don't you just go somewhere else and spread your hollow nonsense, hu? Here are concerned salmon friends who actually care for what the future of our salmon looks like. We are not interested in your weird mental state of condition.
Pretty much-Yeah.[8D]
 
Goodo ris73:
quote:You know handee, if you have nothing else to contribute but this crap why don't you just go somewhere else and spread your hollow nonsense, hu? Here are concerned salmon friends who actually care for what the future of our salmon looks like. We are not interested in your weird mental state of condition.

I agree- at least sockeeyefry used what science and info he had available - even backed-down on a few arguments, when presented with the facts. I enjoyed debating him.

Handee? His responses sounds like something a pile of kindergarten kids would say. Not interested in intelligent debate. But, I think he at least shows us the uncharitable side of the personal attack method used by the fish farm industry.
 
quote:Originally posted by handee

quote:Originally posted by abbyfireguy

Statements like that are understandable in this situation. When one puts in as many hours as those people mentioned, I think they are able to make reasonable conclusions from the experience their hands on research shows them...[}:)]

Alexandra Morton is not a researcher. Shes a rich American who has been trying to get at salmon farms for 15 years. Sea lice got traction because she got funding from Alaska to demarket their competition: BC farm salmon. Her research is pathetic and panned by world experts. DFO studies are massive in scope, sophisticated and done by world fisheries experts who have been on staff for 3 decades and have nothing to gain by lying. Morton and her ilk spend more $$ on news releases than research. Most of their "science" is based on computer models. Guess what computer models funded by Alaska have to say about Sea Lice- of course it says they are the cause. Meanwhile the real criminals- those that club wild salmon to death for fun and profit get away with murder.

I call BS you dont know a lick about ALEX(of should I say you know what you have been pumped full of)
Yes I have met Alex and I have read her books seen all of her videos.

here read this please
http://www.raincoastresearch.org/about.htm

Also lets look at the books she had written

Listening to Whales: What the Orcas Have Taught Us by Alexandra Morton

Siwiti: A Whale's Story (Orca Classic) by Alexandra Morton

MY FAVORITE
Heart of the Raincoast: A Life Story by Alexandra Morton and Billy Proctor

Beyond the Whales: The Photographs and Passions of Alexandra Morton by Alexandra Morton

Die Sinfonie der Wale by Alexandra Morton

In the Company of Whales by Alexandra Morton

and the one that im sure you can't stand

A Stain Upon the Sea: West Coast Salmon Farming by Stephen Eaton Hume, Alexandra Morton, Betty C Keller, and Rosella M Leslie

She is and was first and for most into and all about studing ORCAS.
Sadly the fish farms in the area used noise making devices to chase away preditors for the nets.

In 1993, a new anti-seal measure was introduced - acoustic harassment devices (AHDs). These devices, dubbed acoustic brooms by whale researcher Dr. Jon Lien, work by broadcasting 198 db (the level of a jet engine at take-off) to cause pain in the seal's ears. Manufacturers warned local farmers not to turn the devices on when the seals were close, because the seal would be instantly deafened and the AHD no longer be effective against that seal.

The moment the devices were turned on harbour porpoise evacuated the archipelago and tried to move into Dall porpoise territory in the deeper waters of Blackfish Sound and Queen Charlotte Strait. The orca left, displaced from over 150 square kilometers of their traditional territory. It was as if a door had been slammed in their faces. Fisheries and Oceans Canada was contacted by Raincoast. In 1995, Fisheries did an experiment in the archipelago. Using top researchers, whale scientist Dr. John Ford and their own seal expert Dr. Peter Olesiuk they alternately played and silenced an AHD in the heart of harbour porpoise territory. The study produced dramatic results. When the AHD was on harbour porpoise abundance declined "precipitously," when they were off the diminutive porpoise returned. Section 78 of the Fisheries Act prohibits disturbance and displacement of cetaceans (whales, dolphins and porpoises). But Fisheries Canada and Oceans shelved the study for 7 years and granted more licenses to the salmon farmers for acoustic harassment.

Sadly, there was great debate over whether the devices were even effective. The study used an AHD in the absence of any farm salmon and found seals were actually attracted to the noise in a "dinner bell" effect. Many farmers agreed and told Raincoast they only used them because they were required by insurance companies. Sadly this was the end to Orcas in the Broughton.
 
quote:Originally posted by chris73

You know handee, if you have nothing else to contribute but this crap why don't you just go somewhere else and spread your hollow nonsense, hu? Here are concerned salmon friends who actually care for what the future of our salmon looks like. We are not interested in your weird mental state of condition.

Um, Chris73 what crap are you referring to?
Gimp: I have read all her stuff, thats how I know its bunk. I have been reading her for years. Claim after claim is found to be untrue.

She claimed that farms were scaring away all the whales- research showed that the whales distribution was in line with that of their major prey,chinooks.

She claimed acoustic deterrent devices were scaring the whales. Turns out farms werent using them because they didnt work on sea lions.

She claimed farms were infecting salmon in a nearby stream. investigation showed their infection came from a nearby DFO hatchery.

she claimed that sick escaped farm salmon were responsible for the death of a whale. Forensics showed the whale died of general septicemia and could not have died even if it had consumed sick salmon because warm blooded animals do not get infected by bacteria from cold blooded fish. Her claim wouldnt stand up to the scrutiny of a grade 12 biology student.

Now she has claims about sea lice. Her first study got published and showed nothing - even she said that dipnets biased her results and has now stopped using them- but she still touts her findings as being peer reviewed. All she showed was that bigger fish carry more lice because they have been in saltwater longer than small fish.

Over the next few years, after she claimed extinction of pink salmon, returns in the Broughton continue to be strong- that is if you count all the rivers and all the salmon year classes not just the dataset she cherry picked.

she said in 2003 that if all the farms weren't removed the pinks would not come back. She said that if they did she'd retire. they came back and she didnt retire.

She said that the reason they came back was because some sites had been fallowed. she had said in 2003 this wouldnt work- all farms must go. a peer reviewed study showed that while farms were fallow farm salmon biomass remained steady over a period of 3 years and thus no correlation between farm biomass and pink salmon return rate could be shown because pink returns fluctuated and farm fish biomass didnt.

Now she has input in a couple computer model studies where her peers (ie real scientists, experts who have not made false public claims)have written her a letter saying the study is bunk because of the ridiculous assumptions made to drive the model and because its not supported by real world evidence (ie data thats not computer generated) like fish counts.

Her own uncontrolled study of sea lice in barrels with smolts showed nothing other than some fish died and others didnt. She admitted this in the footnotes of the peer reviewed study (remember peer review does not equal truth or we would all be smoking). So they may have died from sea lice or maybe not- she didnt know. another peer review study showed that even at 10x natural levels sea lice dont kill young pinks.

She has been publicly admonished by the Pacific Salmon Forum for making exaggerated claims in the media after the recent publication in Science.

She is the daughter of a US billionaire with connections to large foundations. She was recognized as an registered biologist because the president at the time was executive director of Suzuki Foundation. Despite her biography I can find no school that gave her a BSc. She has a BA in music. No fisheries, stats, ecology education. ever wondered how she gets so much visibility? Mommy owns production companies. Gimp youd be seeing videos of me if my mom would produce and distribute them for me.

Gimp you are correct she is prolific, but that does not make her an expert. Au contraire, she ignores all data that disagrees with her hypotheis. for example: why have the biggest returns of pinks ever in the Broughton occurred a decade AFTER salmon farming started? its a simple question.

Why do other PEER REVIEWED studies by Beamish and Jones completely refute the claims she makes with her computer models? why do world experts, complete academics having nothing to do with any type of fish farming, take the time to write a complete debunking of her latest paper?

Its been 7 years since she raised the sea lice flag and the salmon runs in the Broughton are doing fine, if not better than runs all up and down the coast of North America. chris73 I know thats hard to hear, it doesnt fit, but you need to understand that it is the truth, salmon return data is well established in the public record. Only by ignoring the Glendale river system- the source of 80% of Broughton pinks- and including other rivers with fish ladders can she make an argument that stocks are declining. You have to have complete tunnel vision to accept Morton's claims.

gimp can you tell me where Morton got her BSc in fisheries science or in some field related to fisheries? Her history of outrageous claims leads me to doubt she has any credentials in this field other than knowing how to drive a a really nice boat.

Dont think me mean. She's on the record, and has been disciplined by the association of RP Bios, for calling DFO scientists, people with decades of experience and many, many peer reviewed studies,liars.
 
I think all the FACTS you quote are filled with a lot of bunk.
Look at the pink run last year through the Broughton,,it was not FINE as you put it...
You make it sound like Ms. Morton is a lone wolf in her conclusions and she has no one of any credibility supporting her..
Seems anyone who has a contrary opinion on fish farming is written off as a nut case..
Sorry, but the fish farms haven't got me believing their PR spin doctoring crap yet..
I wish I could say the same for our regulating bodies and government ministers..
 
Handee,

Nice Post.
Really illustrates the source behind the agenda driven "science". It really is hard for some people on this forum to hear the truth about their hero. It really puzzles me how someone could be wrong so many times, and still have people listening to what she has to say. Guess that is the power of the press

Abby,

The people who corraborate her science are her pals, and funded by the same agenda driven agencies. No one at arms length of her has corroborated her claims, in fact most serious scientists do not.
 
Oh yeah, I forgot. Good post Fogducker. Amazing how she ignores all those factors and narrows it down to a few salmon farms in the Broughton. Course, all the other factors do not fit with her agenda.

Handee Get ready for all the name calling, that usually happens here after you attack the "hero".

Thanks for the compliment Agent, Where have you been?
 
Gimp,

Stephen Hume is her media buddy which makes sure her agenda keeps its presence in the media.
 
Handee wrote this pile of steaming cow poop:

"Alexandra Morton is not a researcher.(lie) Shes a rich American who has been trying to get at salmon farms for 15 years. (lie)Sea lice got traction because she got funding from Alaska to demarket their competition: BC farm salmon.(lie) Her research is pathetic and panned by world experts. (lie) DFO studies are massive in scope, sophisticated and done by world fisheries experts who have been on staff for 3 decades and have nothing to gain by lying. (lie) Morton and her ilk spend more $$ on news releases than research. (lie) Most of their "science" is based on computer models. (lie) Guess what computer models funded by Alaska have to say about Sea Lice- of course it says they are the cause. Meanwhile the real criminals- those that club wild salmon to death for fun and profit get away with murder." (assinine)

WOW! Almost every statement a lie.
That would make the stater a LIAR then I'd say.
And that's what annoys me the most.
I have no use for blatant liars, spin doctors and their ilk.
I will no longer play nice either.
You lie and I'll call you a liar...for all to see.
Simple as that.

Here's another response:

Smearing a researcher

"For years, biologist Alexandra Morton has been testing and reporting on the horrible impact of sea lice on the pink and chum salmon runs in the Broughton Archipelago. Her findings have been consistently proved by independent scientists, yet she's been pilloried, threatened with arrest, slandered and libelled beyond belief. People like Dr. Dan Pauly of UBC, called by Time Magazine one of the top 50 scientists in the world; Dr. Patrick Gargan, probably the world expert on the impact of lice on salmonids; Dr. Neil Frazer and Dr. John Volpe, British Columbians and fish biologists; plus the David Suzuki Foundation have not only supported Alexandra Morton but have said the situation is even worse.

Every paper published in a recognized journal has backed what Morton has to say. She herself has had paper after paper peer reviewed and published. Put another way, you will look in vain to find an independent scientist in the world who disagrees with her."


You guys falsely claim that DFO scientists (who are NOT independents) have had their papers peer-reviewed and published.
Many of us would like to know just where and when that happened.
The Pacific Salmon Forum is down to quoting exerpts from unpublished and incomplete research while desperately trying to find new areas to "research" while the problem still exists and is already well identified, well researched and proven beyond any reasonable doubt.
They have little credibility left with anyone save the industry and government types who seem hell-bent on maintaining the status quo, regardless of the damage.
Yet still the attack poodles from the industry continue their assinine attacks here.

Why?

I'm thinking maybe a couple of summer interns for Greenspirit Consulting or maybe the BCSFA are beavering away at their jobs by posting their crap on discussion boards like this one.
Or maybe they are just honestly concerned citizens fearful that the multi-millionaire Norwegians and Dutch who own most of the industry here in Canada and elsewhere would suffer greatly if they weren't able to have a few more million dollars put into their accounts regularly.
Sacrificing our own wild stocks of salmon for a couple of thousand jobs and sending the profits from the industry to offshore owners just doesn't make any sense at all.
None.


But then I'm not a PhD, so what do I know?

Take care.
 
So Dave, I am pretty ignorant about all the related facts here - except I had a very knowledgeable journalist friend tell me exactly what handee said about Morton's funding - that it came from the Alaska fishing industry. You called this a lie - care to tell us where she does get her funding from?
 
If you look at the acknowledgements section of each peer-reviewed report - this is where they state where the funding for each project came from.
 
um, just one thing- they dont actually state up front who their funders are because Alaska doesnt want to be so obvious. They want the issue to look science driven, not like a demarketting campaign. They give the money to Seaweb who distributes it to groups like Tides who ARE listed in the Acknowledgement section of the published journal.

Hey Dave H digest these lies (I just cant seem to stop lying):

In 2005, sea lice research by Krkosek, Lewis and Volpe was publicized in partnership with
SeaWeb14 at the time that SeaWeb was funded to co-ordinate an "antifarming campaign"
involving "integration of aquaculture science messages," "earned media" and
"co-ordination of media for antifarming ENGOs" (environmental organizations). This
"antifarming campaign" was part of the $190 million Wild Salmon Ecosystems Initiative
of the Gordon and Betty Moore Foundation.
In 2006, The Centre for Mathematical Biology reported to the University of Alberta that
SeaWeb is one of its "research partners."15 The Centre did not list SeaWeb in the
acknowledgements of its scientific paper published six days later. The Centre also reported
to the University of Alberta that SeaWeb's publicity of the sea lice research in British Columbia
generated 148 media stories: 102 in the United States, 28 in Canada and 18 in other countries[thats alot].
According to the 2005 990-PF submitted to the U.S. Internal Revenue Service, the purpose of
the grant from the Moore Foundation to SeaWeb for the "antifarming campaign" was
"to provide a high quality tool-kit and co-ordination infrastructure for use by ENGOs in their
campaigns to shift consumer and retailer demand away from farmed salmon.16
The David Suzuki Foundation and other environmental groups are shifting consumer and
retailer demand away by urging restaurants and chefs to "go farmed salmon free" and through
their "Smarten Up Safeway" campaign. For example, their ad in the New York Times on 24
June 2007 said, "Salmon farms create massive sea lice infestations that kill baby wild
salmon!"17 SeaWeb says, "even a single louse can spell disaster."18 SeaWeb extensively
promotes Alaskan "wild" salmon while demarketing farmed salmon.19,20,21
Not only Krkosek et al. (2006) did not disclose their "research partnership" with SeaWeb,
they also did not disclose that they received funding from a commercial fishing company
that employs approximately 100 [Alaskan] commercial fishermen, Finest At Sea Ocean Products.


14 http://seaweb.org/documents/PR_2005.3.29.pdf
15 http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/secretariat/pdfs/Item4-SCCentreforMathBiolProposalMEETING.pdf
16 http://moore.org/cms/uploadedFiles/2004 Moore Fndn_990PF_complete.pdf See pg. 76.
17 http://farmedanddangerous.org/?action=d7_article_view_folder&Join_ID=82887
18 http://www.seafoodchoices.org/smartchoices/species_salmonpink.php
19 http://seaweb.org/documents/PR_2004.3.9.pdf
20 http://seaweb.org/documents/PR_2004.1.9.pdf
21 http://www.kidsafeseafood.org/bestchoices.php
22 http://www.math.ualberta.ca/~mlewis/SeaLice/SeaLiceFunding.pdf
 
Very nice post Handee. Boy I sure wish I had such access to info. Puts the whole sea lice campaign into perspective. It has nothing to do with safe guarding wild salmon, but promoting alaskan seafood marketing, which by its practises are doing more harm to BC wild salmon than any salmon farm ever could.

Sort of puts to bed the notions of David and Goliath, the little researcher that could, etc... Isn't it now obvious that Morton and Krkosek are the front line of a media campaign, and not the paragons of virtue you all thought. Has this info made you rethink your position against salmon farmers, and maybe just maybe want you to open a dialogue with the farmers and find out how they can assist you in your wild salmon conservation?
 
Back
Top