Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: chris gadsden on April 14, 2012, 10:23:35 PM
-
http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/2012/04/new-norwegian-virus-in-supermarket-farm-salmon.html#comments
-
http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/2012/04/new-norwegian-virus-in-supermarket-farm-salmon.html#comments
Hard to say what is worse..... virus infected salmon that bypasses the Canadian food inspection system or Canadian food inspection agency approved hormone and antibiotic filled, dyed salmon. It's a case of pick your poison.
-
Shes starting to really look the moron now.....how can you run tests on fish with no organs, after all arent they gutted before they are put up for sale?? Besides who buys fresh fish from super store anyways..lol.
Suprised Chris didnt post the story from the CBC http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/04/14/bc-salmon-virus-morton.html (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/04/14/bc-salmon-virus-morton.html)...Bit of a different story here... ;D
-
Shes starting to really look the moron now.....how can you run tests on fish with no organs, after all arent they gutted before they are put up for sale?? Besides who buys fresh fish from super store anyways..lol.
Ad hominem and appeal to ridicule fallacies sandwiching a possibly valid claim. If you really believed the latter, why do you need the former?
Suprised Chris didnt post the story from the CBC http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/04/14/bc-salmon-virus-morton.html (http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/04/14/bc-salmon-virus-morton.html)...Bit of a different story here... ;D
What was the farmers response?
"I think that it is probably quite unscientific..." ...again, hardly coming out swinging.
-
Gotta say I have never seen a fish in such poor condition for sale, anywhere, especially a big name outlet like the Real Canadian Superstore.
Can you say unbelievable?
-
Gotta love it......................Alexandra Morton suits up and sets out on another sampling expedition in the wilds of British Columbia... :D
(http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/.a/6a0120a56ab882970c0167650668df970b-800wi)
-
Gotta love it......................Alexandra Morton suits up and sets out on another sampling expedition in the wilds of British Columbia... :D
(http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/.a/6a0120a56ab882970c0167650668df970b-800wi)
Good thing someone is doing it.
-
Sorry Chris, I think it was a poor choice of photo to illustrate her point.
-
Sorry Chris, I think it was a poor choice of photo to illustrate her point.
No matter what she does there is some people that will find fault and criticize but when you believe in what you are doing it just rolls off your back.
-
Just asking here ... has anybody reading this ever seen such skanky fish for sale in a big name store? I live in Chilliwack and since AM began this crusade I have been closely watching the Atlantics, and other fish species for sale in stores that sell fish.
I have never seen such poor quality fish for sale and if they were there I would have reported it to the manager.
For this to have legs she should tell us the address of these stores; why doesn't she? What store manager would attempt to sell salmon with what appear to have lesions near the anal fin?
I have seen better fish sold from a pickup near Yale, in August, in the sun.
Dave, not buying it just yet
-
Dave, not buying it just yet
Now if we could convince more folks to stop buying that crap, we could put the feedlots out of business. ;D
-
I always look at the farm salmon for sale in stores. I have never seen anything that looks like that. Never. Not even close.
-
weak :D
Hope the Canucks respond better tonight than that post. To be plain, has anyone ever seen fish like what Ms. Morton buys regularly in big name stores? If so, where.
-
Sorry aquapaloosa, I should have quoted af ;)
-
http://www.callingfromthecoast.com/video-test-page/salmon-farm-diseases-and-sockeye-2/
-
To be plain, has anyone ever seen fish like what Ms. Morton buys regularly in big name stores? If so, where.
Again, anyone ...
-
Again, anyone ...
Just what are you suggesting Dave? From where do you suppose she got the Atlantic Salmon in BC?
-
"I think that it is probably quite unscientific to test samples from a supermarket. There is no research design
Ms. Morton isn't doing scientific investigation, it is forensics where you work with the evidence you have. It seems she has found several smoking guns. Now it is up to the 'authorities' to check the fingerprints, ballistics, alibis etc. Problem is that it is not apparent to interested observers, many of us, that the authorities are taking the smoking guns seriously. Maybe they know better in which case they need to share their insight with us.
-
Wow.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-205547/Salmon-health-alert.html
-
Good stuff Chris, you found Staniford! We were wondering when he would arise from the ashes ;D
-
No doubt someones working on a cure to HSMI. Only problem is that the cure might end up causing your next offspring to be born without body parts or heart and muscle problems.
I know that will not stop some people from chowing down on those toxic morsels.
-
Good stuff Chris, you found Staniford! We were wondering when he would arise from the ashes ;D
Wow Dave, You are really starting to worry me!
Chris posts an article about the PCBs, dioxins and agricultural pesticides such as toxaphene and dieldrin found in farmed salmon and all you can get from it is that you found Staniford. I suggest always reading the title as it will give you a hint of what to actually be looking for as you read the article..... :D
Or do you just hit Ctrl F and type in Staniford without even bothering to read the articles? ???
-
Appreciate your concern af. But no, just glad Don has found a home as the world desperately needs clowns :D
But hey, since you asked, do you really think we should be comparing contaminate loading in those sampled Scottish salmon to BC salmon? Conditions don't appear similar, at least from that article.
-
Appreciate your concern af. But no, just glad Don has found a home as the world desperately needs clowns :D
But hey, since you asked, do you really think we should be comparing contaminate loading in those sampled Scottish salmon to BC salmon? Conditions don't appear similar, at least from that article.
The conditions are probably the same in BC..... we just haven't been made aware of it. :'(
-
Things that make you go hmmmm.
http://fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?l=e&id=51475&ndb=1 (http://fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?l=e&id=51475&ndb=1)
http://www.fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?monthyear=&day=17&id=51494&l=e&special=&ndb=1%20target (http://www.fis.com/fis/worldnews/worldnews.asp?monthyear=&day=17&id=51494&l=e&special=&ndb=1%20target)
-
Ms. Morton isn't doing scientific investigation, it is forensics where you work with the evidence you have. It seems she has found several smoking guns. Now it is up to the 'authorities' to check the fingerprints, ballistics, alibis etc. Problem is that it is not apparent to interested observers, many of us, that the authorities are taking the smoking guns seriously. Maybe they know better in which case they need to share their insight with us.
Let me get this straight…..Alexandra Morton is a member (Registered Professional Biologist) of the BC College of Applied Biology, holds an honorary doctorate degree from Simon Fraser University, has been author and co-author of scientific reports published in peer-reviewed journals, but she isn’t doing scientific investigation in this particular case - rather forensics where you work with the evidence you have? So, forensics do not involve “scientific investigation”? Instead, it is up to the “authorities” (the ones she does not trust in the first place) to check out her claims to see if they are valid? I totally disagree. At some point the “authorities” are involved, but they are not responsible for holding her hand while she is doing this “study”. One would think that if Morton is as competent as she claims to be (given the number of papers with her name on them) then she would take the time to do it right. If Morton is supposed to be a reputable scientist wanting defensible data then there is no short cut. A clear chain of custody is imperative when you conduct sampling – especially for samples destined for DNA analysis. What methods and protocols were employed in the collection and preservation of these samples – other than just going to the store? Do we know much more about these fish other than they were purchased at these stores? If she wants credibility then it has to be earned with some actual scientific investigation. This again falls short.
After reading Morton’s findings, I am surprised that not many people have commented much on the size of these fish (regardless of their general condition on the outside). If the majority of these fish had a deadly disease then why did they survive to market size? HSMI tends to affect younger fish and not these larger fish that Morton apparently purchased. I agree with Dr. Marty when he says that the finding of this reovirus in these larger fish is good evidence that the reovirus is very common in Atlantic Salmon, but not the cause of disease in these fish.
I believe Dr. Kristi Miller is doing good work, but farm critics might want to know more about her recent findings as they might not align with their new-found love for DFO scientists (you know…the scientists they love to call corrupt and biased). In fact, Dr. Miller’s recent study of ISAv in farmed Chinook was much better than Ms Morton’s. Dr. Miller’s results were linked to data from licensed veterinarian that sampled the fish and a board-certified veterinary pathologist who did the examination. Sections of organs were examined under a microscope. At this point it should be noted that actual “scientific investigation” is being used by people that know what they are doing. There was no going to the store and asking the store clerk or whoever where the fish came from. There was no “flying-by-the-seat-of-your-pants” type of science or rush to get this out the door to score media points. I doubt there were chain of custody issues given that a person like Dr. Miller is involved. The results were that the prevalence of ISAv was the same in healthy fish as it was in unhealthy fish. I believe Dr. Miller makes mention of this in Cohen Inquiry testimony. Although the results still need to be confirmed it provides strong evidence that whatever Dr. Miller was finding was not the cause of the disease in the farmed Chinook.
-
One would think that if Morton is as competent as she claims to be (given the number of papers with her name on them) then she would take the time to do it right. If Morton is supposed to be a reputable scientist wanting defensible data then there is no short cut. A clear chain of custody is imperative when you conduct sampling – especially for samples destined for DNA analysis. What methods and protocols were employed in the collection and preservation of these samples – other than just going to the store? Do we know much more about these fish other than they were purchased at these stores? If she wants credibility then it has to be earned with some actual scientific investigation. This again falls short.
[/quote]
In the articles posted above, Morton herself admits that testing store bought salmon is not her first choice, and she says she has asked for access to the farms to test their fish directly, but they have refused...but who can blame them. I wouldn't want anyone testing my disease free, toxin free, tasty pink fleshed salmon either.
After reading Morton’s findings, I am surprised that not many people have commented much on the size of these fish (regardless of their general condition on the outside). If the majority of these fish had a deadly disease then why did they survive to market size? HSMI tends to affect younger fish and not these larger fish that Morton apparently purchased. I agree with Dr. Marty when he says that the finding of this reovirus in these larger fish is good evidence that the reovirus is very common in Atlantic Salmon, but not the cause of disease in these fish.
In the article aquapaloosa posted, Morton says these fish were undersized. Could this be because the farmers harvested them early after detecting the virus and before any disease killed them? Furthermore, even if these fish were only carriers of the virus, the danger is the spread of the virus to wild fish passing near the pens or eating smaller fish that swim through the pens, which could later succumb to disease as they make the stressful journey to the spawning beds...but we all know THAT could never happen.
-
I had this weird dream where Dave (who I've never seen) looked like Staniford and was doing serious damage at the dinner table to some farmed salmon. Next thing I know he can't type or talk because of some sort of muscle disorder. ???
" But no, just glad Don has found a home as the world desperately needs clowns " :-\
Eat em til you can't put the fork to your mouth. :-*
-
I had this weird dream where Dave (who I've never seen) looked like Staniford and was doing serious damage at the dinner table to some farmed salmon. Next thing I know he can't type or talk because of some sort of muscle disorder. ??
;D
-
More Wow. ;D ;D
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/supermarket-salmon-test-positive-for-virus-found-in-europe/article2405799/
-
-1 ;D
-
More Wow. ;D ;D
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/british-columbia/supermarket-salmon-test-positive-for-virus-found-in-europe/article2405799/
I'll say! Did you read some of the comments at the end of Hume's story? Not very complimentary to AM ::)
-
It is interesting to read the comments. AM=not too popular.
-
It is interesting to read the comments. AM=not too popular.
You guys are not too popular either but I am sure you are not worried either, goes with the territory. ;D ;D ;D
-
It is interesting to read the comments. AM=not too popular.
I might add they most likely said the same about the East Coast cod fishery. :o
-
In the articles posted above, Morton herself admits that testing store bought salmon is not her first choice, and she says she has asked for access to the farms to test their fish directly, but they have refused...but who can blame them. I wouldn't want anyone testing my disease free, toxin free, tasty pink fleshed salmon either.
In the article aquapaloosa posted, Morton says these fish were undersized. Could this be because the farmers harvested them early after detecting the virus and before any disease killed them? Furthermore, even if these fish were only carriers of the virus, the danger is the spread of the virus to wild fish passing near the pens or eating smaller fish that swim through the pens, which could later succumb to disease as they make the stressful journey to the spawning beds...but we all know THAT could never happen.
Why should Morton be allowed to test their fish directly? I would rather see someone competent to actually do the testing. After that episode with Sockeye smolts from River’s Inlet last October I don’t blame fish farmers for not being too thrilled about Morton wanting access.
Undersized? If these fish had this deadly disease they should have been dead long before they reached this size. Morton says they were undersized? Of course she is going to say that…She likes to work her conclusions to fit her results. I guess one can assume that the farmers did this or that, but for now that is just speculation. We will never really know because Morton never took the time to do a proper study as I alluded to already. People like Morton were once invited to work with fish farmers but I think that invitation has worn thin with all this media hype now. It is not about science anymore with Morton.
-
It is interesting to read the comments. AM=not too popular.
You guys are apparently thinking she's in some kind of a popularity contest..... I believe her only concern is saving the wild salmon.
-
Why should Morton be allowed to test their fish directly? I would rather see someone competent to actually do the testing. After that episode with Sockeye smolts from River’s Inlet last October I don’t blame fish farmers for not being too thrilled about Morton wanting access.
You really need to check your facts.... Morton doesn't do the testing on the fish, she never has. All the samples she collects are sent to qualified labs for testing.
As far as fish farmers not allowing access.... if I had something to hide I wouldn't want to allow access either. Do you think the fish farms would have self reported that they were catching and killing wild salmon along with the farmed stock?
-
As far as fish farmers not allowing access.... if I had something to hide I wouldn't want to allow access either. Do you think the fish farms would have self reported that they were catching and killing wild salmon along with the farmed stock?
Salmon farms are not hiding anything. That idea is just part of your conspiracy theory.
If I owned a salmon farming company why would I give information to any individual whose primary purpose it to get rid of me regardless of facts. Morton time and time again has been proven wrong. This after taking information (no mater where she gets it from) and delivering it in a manor that suits her cause. Make no mistake AM is an activist apposing salmon farms. Her purpose is activism under the flag of saving wild salmon which I strongly believe she is not. Promoting the consumption of wild salmon is not saving them. Gathering support from all the other interested partys is not saving them.
What ever happened to ISAe??? Remember the big press release where it was ISAe they said they found with there pail white faces. Now they are not talking about it much. Hmmm, why is that?
You ever heard of by-catch? This bycatch of wild salmon happens in many forms. Are you aware of how many different types. Are you aware of the management practices in place for all the different types. If You want to worry about by catch you should start by looking long and hard at commercial fishing. There is where you will find a way way way larger amount of by catch. Not to detract from salmon farming bycatch. Salmon farms are in a good position to manage bycatch and keep it to a minimum though it always has be very low.
I will ask you this question again: The fact is that some of the supporters here are accomplished fish biologists that have worked in other (salmon)fields entirely and for many years. Those individuals seem to bring the most to this forum when it comes to information about salmon management. So why would they support salmon farming in BC? Why? How could it be?
Insert conspiracy theory here, I guess.
PCB's here...
What happened in chili and norway etc here.....
Dye here.....
Dead Zones here....
Conversion here....
AF, Did you read Everydays post on the other thread. Might be a good little refresher for you.
-
Salmon farms are not hiding anything. That idea is just part of your conspiracy theory.
If I owned a salmon farming company why would I give information to any individual whose primary purpose it to get rid of me regardless of facts. Morton time and time again has been proven wrong. This after taking information (no mater where she gets it from) and delivering it in a manor that suits her cause. Make no mistake AM is an activist apposing salmon farms. Her purpose is activism under the flag of saving wild salmon which I strongly believe she is not. Promoting the consumption of wild salmon is not saving them. Gathering support from all the other interested partys is not saving them.
Of course she is an activist who opposes salmon feedlots! Why should she be viewed more critically than the activists who oppose the Enbridge pipeline or the activists that oppose smoking in any public places, or the environmentalists that are against clear cutting, or for that matter any government agency that monitors businesses that process food in order to ensure that our food is safe for us to eat??
How would you feel if the government was the only one that could provide input into the environmental approval of the Enbridge pipeline and "activists" were muzzled. Unfortunately you and a few others on this forum are so convinced that the feedlots are harmless that you can't see the need to look at them with an unbiased and critical eye. Applying your attitudes and arguments to any other environmental issues would allow government and business to do whatever they wanted in order to generate taxes and profits. That isn't good policy, and it would be irresponsible. It's a fundamental part of a democratic nation.
By the way, although it's typical of the feedlot business to redirect blame when they can't defend their own position, you need to know that AM has never promoted the consumption of wild salmon!
-
No worries AF pretty soon youll have your pipeline and tankers of our coast and after a few leaks (and they will happen BTW) there will be no salmon or steelhead for us to bitch and whine about and finally AM will have to shut her pie hole... ;D
-
You really need to check your facts.... Morton doesn't do the testing on the fish, she never has. All the samples she collects are sent to qualified labs for testing.
Trust me af, Shuswapsteve knows his facts ;) He knows AM doesn't do the testing as do we all. He is suggesting she is not qualified to do the sampling, as her previous submissions have shown time and time again.
-
AF, Will you answer this question?:
The fact is that some of the supporters here are accomplished fish biologists that have worked in other (salmon)fields entirely and for many years. Those individuals seem to bring the most to this forum when it comes to information about salmon management. So why would they support salmon farming in BC? Why? How could this be?
-
Why should she be viewed more critically than the activists who oppose the Enbridge pipeline or the activists that oppose smoking in any public
Her track record of being wrong for one.
Her record of being uncorrectable.
Her practice of hand picking data.
Her practice of hand picking seines.
Her practice of changing topics
Her practice of not following up.
Her practice of media use.
Her practice of misleading the public.
What have I missed?
ISAe (europe), what about that one. Again, remember the big press release. Just a lie. Just wrong. Just misleading.
-
AF, Will you answer this question?:
The fact is that some of the supporters here are accomplished fish biologists that have worked in other (salmon)fields entirely and for many years. Those individuals seem to bring the most to this forum when it comes to information about salmon management. So why would they support salmon farming in BC? Why? How could this be?
Maybe they will give their names along with the degrees they have and where they are or were employed. ;D ;D ;D
-
We will never really know because Morton never took the time to do a proper study as I alluded to already.
No, as I alluded to already, she was never given the time "to do a proper study". As I said, I do not blame the farmers for not wanting her to test their fish. Just stop saying she could have done a proper study but chose not to. That is just not true. Whatever their reasons, the farmers refuse to allow her to test their salmon (even if she were to take it to a reputable lab for independent analysis). So stop with the ad hominem attacks on her character trying to make it sound like she had an opportunity to test the farm salmon directly.
-
Maybe they will give their names along with the degrees they have and where they are or were employed. Grin Grin Grin
And this will make you consider their views???
I suspect that a conspiracy theory will effect your judgement.
-
Undersized? If these fish had this deadly disease they should have been dead long before they reached this size.
From what I have read, while morbidity is high in infected cages, mortality is around 20%, which means 80% could survive to grow larger (although they may remain "undersized")
.
http://www.virologyj.com/content/7/1/309 (http://www.virologyj.com/content/7/1/309)
-
And this will make you consider their views???
I suspect that a conspiracy theory will effect your judgement.
I consider everyones views but I have yet to be convinced that we are not treading in dangerous waters.
Not enough transparency from some governments and this makes one wonder what is going to happen to our environment in a number of fronts in the years ahead.
Oliver defends limiting access to resource reviews
By Peter O'Neil, Postmedia News April 19, 2012 Environmental groups that don't have particular expertise to offer, and ordinary citizens concerned about projects like the Northern Gateway oilsands pipeline but who don't live or work near the project, shouldn't be able to participate in environmental review hearings, Natural Resources Minister Joe Oliver said Wednesday.
Oliver was defending his government's plan unveiled a day earlier to "strengthen environmental protection" by limiting participation only to members of the public who are "directly affected" by major projects.
"We don't see the need" to allow testimony from Canadians outside the project areas, or from environmental groups without specific expertise, Oliver said in an interview.
Oliver also defended the government's announcement Tuesday that it will let the federal cabinet overrule the Calgary-based National Energy Board, a quasi-independent agency created by John Diefenbaker in 1959, on major projects considered to be in the "national interest" by Ottawa. "The rationale is that for large projects that can have a national or regional impact of significance, both environment and economic, we believe the ultimate decision should be in the hands of elected officials and not appointed officials because ultimately through Parliament elected officials are responsible to the people."
Neither initiative was mentioned in Oliver's speech and his news release Tuesday, though they were cited in publicly-available background documents. Oliver said Wednesday his government wasn't trying to hide its plan to clip the NEB's wings as the final authority on major projects.
"Look, the whole legislative package is a complicated one and we wanted to emphasize the job creation aspect of it. We didn't highlight [the cabinet override] but we certainly didn't hide it."
The joint NEB-Canadian Environmental Assessment Agency process that began in January has involved testimony primarily from aboriginal Canadians in B.C. and Alberta living near Enbridge Inc.'s proposed pipeline route from the Edmonton area to Kitimat on the West Coast.
However, the NEB has also heard from groups like the T. Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation and the United Fishermen and Allied Workers Union.
And during a four-month period starting in November the NEB had scheduled hearings for registered participants from cities outside the project area, including Calgary, Vancouver, Victoria, Kelowna and Port Hardy.
Green party leader Elizabeth May said the environmental assessment agency's "cornerstone" is public participation, yet the government's efforts are intended to limit that input.
"Many projects with significant environmental impacts may be located in remote locations," May said.
"Canadians are entitled to be concerned about fragile ecosystems in the Arctic or significant new sources of new pollution, even if they do not live in the immediate vicinity. "Imagine if the government of Brazil said people living in Rio de Janeiro had no business expressing concern about the destruction of the Amazon. This provision will make Canada a global laughing stock."
Read more: http://www.timescolonist.com/technology/Oliver+defends+limiting+access+resource+reviews/6483990/story.html#ixzz1sXMja2lT
-
How would you feel if the government was the only one that could provide input into the environmental approval of the Enbridge pipeline and "activists" were muzzled.
Isn't that exactly what is happening?
Budget has increased funds for auditing charitable groups.....
Budget has decreased funding for environmental monitoring.......
DFO research funds and staff reduced.......
Review process abreviated.............
Shortened time line applied retroactively for reviews.......
Enbridge hearings canceled in Bella Bella.........
Good thing you agree with the pending approval......................................Right?
-
More bad news on the Global evening news tonight for FF that Bassonator mentioned on another thread. Will find the link later for those that may want to see the bad news. :o
-
Global tonight, looking forward to the responses from the Pro guys, I know they will pick it apart. :o ::) ;D
http://www.globaltvbc.com/video/another+fish+farm+fight/video.html?v=2225255779&p=1&s=dd#video
-
Global tonight, looking forward to the responses from the Pro guys, I know they will pick it apart. :o ::) ;D
http://www.globaltvbc.com/video/another+fish+farm+fight/video.html?v=2225255779&p=1&s=dd#video
Yup, it's always good to hear the opinions of folks that have their pro-feedlot blinders on...... ??? can't wait.
-
Yup, it's always good to hear the opinions of folks that have their pro-feedlot blinders on...... ??? can't wait.
Yes they should be typing now. ;D ;D
-
Typical Morton Style. Her work is done on this one. Like the IASe in BC waters claim she made, she will not have to answer to anyone when the truth or doubt comes about the general public. By then its not worthy of news anymore. All she has to do is make the news and thats the end of her work on any project regardless of fact. Hardly science if you ask me.
None of the anti's seem to want to answer my question: So what did happen with that ISAe thing?
Again I will ask this question: The fact is that some of the supporters here are accomplished fish biologists that have worked in other (salmon)fields entirely and for many years. Those individuals seem to bring the most to this forum when it comes to information about salmon management. So why would they support salmon farming in BC? Why? How could this be?
Chris was nice enough to hint at a conspiracy theory. Do you have any other ideas campaigners?
-
Typical Morton Style. Her work is done on this one. Like the IASe in BC waters claim she made, she will not have to answer to anyone when the truth or doubt comes about the general public. By then its not worthy of news anymore. All she has to do is make the news and thats the end of her work on any project regardless of fact. Hardly science if you ask me.
None of the anti's seem to want to answer my question: So what did happen with that ISAe thing?
Again I will ask this question: The fact is that some of the supporters here are accomplished fish biologists that have worked in other (salmon)fields entirely and for many years. Those individuals seem to bring the most to this forum when it comes to information about salmon management. So why would they support salmon farming in BC? Why? How could this be?
Chris was nice enough to hint at a conspiracy theory. Do you have any other ideas campaigners?
Glad you came in before I went to bed, will sleep well tonight now. ;D ;D
Looking forward to the others to wade into the murky waters by morning. ::) ;D
-
Either their hearts not in it or they can't muscle up a retort.
-
This is starting to remind me of that old Beatles song “Happiness is a Warm Gun” … another disease found, good news for the anti salmon farmers :D
Routledge covered his a$$ several times with the words ‘possible and potentially’
Here’s another – he could “potentially’ look even worse on this than the last time he backed Morton. Time will tell.
-
This is starting to remind me of that old Beatles song “Happiness is a Warm Gun” … another disease found, good news for the anti salmon farmers :D
Routledge covered his *** several times with the words ‘possible and potentially’
Here’s another – he could “potentially’ look even worse on this than the last time he backed Morton. Time will tell.
Yes time will indeed tell, I hope it will not be too late as it has been on many environmental issues in the past when money and profit comes before looking after our environment, including our wild fish stocks.
-
It seems Routledge is looking for the attention rather than the attention looking for Routledge. The Public Relations Department at SFU announced on April 18th that he was available to comment. Apparently Global took him up on it. I wonder if they will interview anyone who is an expert in fish diseases?
http://www.sfu.ca/pamr/issues-experts/2012/bc-fish-controversy-intensifies.html (http://www.sfu.ca/pamr/issues-experts/2012/bc-fish-controversy-intensifies.html)
-
It seems Routledge is looking for the attention rather than the attention looking for Routledge. The Public Relations Department at SFU announced on April 18th that he was available to comment. Apparently Global took him up on it. I wonder if they will interview anyone who is an expert in fish diseases?
http://www.sfu.ca/pamr/issues-experts/2012/bc-fish-controversy-intensifies.html (http://www.sfu.ca/pamr/issues-experts/2012/bc-fish-controversy-intensifies.html)
]A very good idea, you should get Dave and others pro's from this site together and approach Global Vancouver and do a story.
Try to get Mary Ellen to join you.
The link is "globalbc.newstips@globaltv.ca" <globalbc.newstips@globaltv.ca> Ask for Linda Aylesworth or Ted Field.
Please let us know when the story will run.
-
Curious that you know the procedure and have that link at hand.
Is there a story behind that you haven't shared with us?
-
Curious that you know the procedure and have that link at hand.
Is there a story behind that you haven't shared with us?
No real story but I have free lanced as some on this forum know, for BC TV, now Global with a number of news stories over the years, I think I have given them about 13 stories during the last 10 or more years with 10 or 11 airing. Also I have been in front of the camera a few times, one with Chris Galius where we were rescuing stranded chum because of a flood on the Vedder River. You must have seen it. ;D We had a permit to do so. ;D ;D
The only one close to one of my news stories I shot being about fish was with Dave, ;D ;D many years ago when he worked for FOC and it was about sockeye dying on the Harrison. Need to look that tape up and see what he said. ;D ;D ;D. This was well before fish farms were a topic of discussion. Dave has a copy too, he may want to review. I believe the thought was they were dying of a Parvicapsula infection. The samples were send away for testing, I never heard what it was but Dave may remember what the results were.
Hope this answered your question and good luck with Ted and Linda.
-
Yup, it was Parvicapsula and it was indeed before fish farms became the threat they have become to some ;)
-
Good on you Chris. I said of you some months back that I had no doubt you were full of life. This confirms it.
-
Yup, it was Parvicapsula and it was indeed before fish farms became the threat they have become to some ;)
Don't tread on me. ;D ;D ;D
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gadsden_flag
-
Tea Party symbol
Beginning in 2007 at Ron Paul Rallies , the Gadsden Flag has become an adopted symbol of the American Tea Party movement. Nationwide it serves as an addendum to the stars and stripes, stressing the Tea Party platform. It was also seen being displayed by members of Congress at Tea Party rallies. Some lawmakers have dubbed it a political symbol because of the Tea Party connection, and the political nature of Tea Party supporters.
Pretty impresive legacy you got going there. :)
-
You really need to check your facts.... Morton doesn't do the testing on the fish, she never has. All the samples she collects are sent to qualified labs for testing.
As far as fish farmers not allowing access.... if I had something to hide I wouldn't want to allow access either. Do you think the fish farms would have self reported that they were catching and killing wild salmon along with the farmed stock?
I didn't say that Morton did the actual testing of those smolts. I mentioned the River's Inlet fiasco to illustrate that Morton's advice on those samples was sought by Routledge. We all know know how well those samples were preserved, but that didn't stop Morton or Routledge from trying to score some media points. Apparently, it never occured to Morton to even ask the basic questions on how those samples were taken and preserved.....but then again she isn't a fish pathologist. Sorry to burst your bubble, AF.
As for the fish farms not self reporting you fail to realize that annual reports of the industry were published on the provincial website. If you really think they were "hiding" something then you need to provide some evidence. So far you have squat.
-
No, as I alluded to already, she was never given the time "to do a proper study". As I said, I do not blame the farmers for not wanting her to test their fish. Just stop saying she could have done a proper study but chose not to. That is just not true. Whatever their reasons, the farmers refuse to allow her to test their salmon (even if she were to take it to a reputable lab for independent analysis). So stop with the ad hominem attacks on her character trying to make it sound like she had an opportunity to test the farm salmon directly.
The industry gave opportunities to Morton in the past to work on this collaboratively. She chose to go on the path she is on now. This recent virus scare shows that Morton is not interested in good science. If she were she would have also considered the debate that surrounds the PRV and HSMI and not jump to conclusions. It is not a given that those two things are associated with one another; however, she conveniently plants the seed once again. For your own knowledge, in 2010, the province looked found PRV was common in Atlantic Salmon, but that the infection was not related to the disease. The province also found that PRV was not associated with wild fish. In 2008, 150 juvenile Pink Salmon (note that I said juvenile) in a retrospective analysis of saved tissue samples. None of them had suspicious heart lesions, all were tested for piscine reovirus anyway; all results were negative—no virus (Saksida et al. 2012).
It wasn’t a proper study because she failed to consider the other literature on the topic as well as actually looking at the tissues themselves. Morton basically wanted to rush this out as quick as she could. When you cut corners this is what happens. As for attacks on her character that is nonsense. If she is going to go out on a limb like this a be critical of other scientists of their findings then she should expect no different treatment. When you are a RPBio that comes with the territory. If you remember it was Morton that depicted government scientists in a very disrectful cartoon on her blog during the aquaculture portion of the Cohen Inquiry. Who is really the one attacking?
Saksida, S.M., G.D. Marty, S. St-Hilaire, S.R.M. Jones, H.A. Manchester, C.L. Diamond, and J. Bidulka. 2012. Parasites and hepatic lesions among pink salmon, Oncorhynchus gorbuscha (Walbaum), during early seawater residence. J. Fish Dis. 35:137-151.
-
The industry gave opportunities to Morton in the past to work on this collaboratively. She chose to go on the path she is on now.
When exactly was this? I do not remember such an invitation being extended to her. I apologize in advance if that was the case.
This recent virus scare shows that Morton is not interested in good science. If she were she would have also considered the debate that surrounds the PRV and HSMI and not jump to conclusions. It is not a given that those two things are associated with one another; however, she conveniently plants the seed once again. For your own knowledge, in 2010, the province looked found PRV was common in Atlantic Salmon, but that the infection was not related to the disease. The province also found that PRV was not associated with wild fish. In 2008, 150 juvenile Pink Salmon (note that I said juvenile) in a retrospective analysis of saved tissue samples. None of them had suspicious heart lesions, all were tested for piscine reovirus anyway; all results were negative—no virus (Saksida et al. 2012).
I thought the reason the government scientists ignored the discovery of PRV in the farmed salmon was because they found it in wild salmon as well (without any increase in disease rates in those cases) so they concluded that PRV must not be not related to HSMI.
As for attacks on her character that is nonsense. If she is going to go out on a limb like this a be critical of other scientists of their findings then she should expect no different treatment. When you are a RPBio that comes with the territory. If you remember it was Morton that depicted government scientists in a very disrectful cartoon on her blog during the aquaculture portion of the Cohen Inquiry. Who is really the one attacking?
If what you say is true, then you both are. Two wrongs do not make it right.
-
When exactly was this? I do not remember such an invitation being extended to her. I apologize in advance if that was the case.
I thought the reason the government scientists ignored the discovery of PRV in the farmed salmon was because they found it in wild salmon as well (without any increase in disease rates in those cases) so they concluded that PRV must not be not related to HSMI.
If what you say is true, then you both are. Two wrongs do not make it right.
No apologies necessary because I admit that I do not have an exact date when this happened. The fish farm industry made attempts to work collaboratively with Ms Morton back when sea lice was the flavour of the day. This information has come from blog responses from the people in the industry. This came up when people were questioning why Morton wasn’t allowed to test at fish farms. Now one can say that fish farmers are lying, but I think there was a time when the collaboration was possible. After Cohen, these virus scares in the media and the demarketing campaign being waged I doubt that is even possible anymore. It is too bad that divisions are as wide as they are now.
Government scientists didn’t ignore PRV. What they did that Morton didn’t do is actually look at the tissues themselves for disease. It didn’t just involve just looking for the virus. People make the false assumption that having a virus means that you always have a disease. As Miller’s study displayed, even healthy fish can have a virus.
How am I attacking her character? It is her methods and her study design which I question. In my opinion, Morton has made assertions which are not substantiated with an actual defensible study. She is supposed to be a RPBio. There is a certain level of expectation that comes with that. In her blog, there is no mention of methods followed other than she went to these supermarkets with these other ladies to purchase these “gutted” fish. There is also no chain of custody mention and more importantly we really have no idea where the fish really came from. In fact, she is still trying to find out, but subtly linking this to the BC industry apparently made more sense at the time. There is also no mention of controls for this study. She makes conclusions without even becoming aware of all the literature on the subject. If you read the abstract from the study she posted on her blog those researchers looked at the actual tissues of the fish (i.e. cardiac tissue). On the other hand, Morton was working with gutted fish so she was not able to properly assess for disease through histological examination, but she does not really make that disclaimer known in her blog. Previous work by the province involved looking at the tissues for disease – not just looking for the virus.
Sorry, but Morton does not get a free pass on this from me because she couldn’t test fish directly from the farms. It is all the more reason why she could have shown a little more restraint in her blog. I can tell you for a fact that government scientists or biologists with private consultants are not treated with kid gloves for these types of glaring omissions. Many of the things Morton missed in her “study” are well known by those doing this work already. A reputable biologist should be aware of a proper study design. In my opinion, Morton is not qualified to do this type of work. Someone more competent from her side needs to be involved in any testing. That is why I do not feel she should be doing any testing of farmed salmon on BC farms. That is not attacking her character. If farm critics feel she should not be questioned about her methodology and study design then she has no business being a RPBio.
-
]A very good idea, you should get Dave and others pro's from this site together and approach Global Vancouver and do a story.
Try to get Mary Ellen to join you.
The link is "globalbc.newstips@globaltv.ca" <globalbc.newstips@globaltv.ca> Ask for Linda Aylesworth or Ted Field.
Please let us know when the story will run.
Good on you Chris! I'm sure we're all looking forward to a rash of pro-feedlot interviews in the future.... ;D ;D I haven't seen much of their propaganda on TV since that silly campaign they ran a year or so ago.
-
Good on you Chris! I'm sure we're all looking forward to a rash of pro-feedlot interviews in the future.... ;D ;D I haven't seen much of their propaganda on TV since that silly campaign they ran a year or so ago.
We dont need to, Morton and Stanford have done quite good for us... ;D
-
We dont need to, Morton and Stanford have done quite good for us... ;D
Cop - out. ::)