Hey Sandman, I just wanted to know what you meant by high densities - that's all. I typically ask that type of a question when someone says either too high or too low (my father used to say "How long is a piece of string"}. I just found the density value on BC Salmon Facts, so it is not as if I am a fish farmer and knew this all along. If you think it's bogus then by all means express it. I didn't mean any ill will by the question or make it seem like I was some aquaculturalist. I actually appreciate your coherent responses even if I do not agree with them all the time. Peace.
No worries Steve, I was not insulted by your request for clarification, but just to clarify, I did
not say the densities were "too high", I just said they were high. 15kg/m
3 is the maximum stocking density recommended by the UK's Farm Animal Welfare Council in 1996, and which is higher than densities (10kg/m
3) identified by groups like CIWF and WSPA as ideal to ensure salmon welfare. Again, I did not saying that BC Salmon farm densities were "too" high, I was simply pointing out that these densities (15kg/m
3) are higher than the natural densities salmon would experience in the wild while they are swimming freely in the ocean, compounded by the fact that they are not able to migrate thousands of kilometers as they would in the wild, cannot swim at high speeds as they would in the wild, etc. I am well aware of the studies regarding stocking densities like that of James Turnbull et al, who had identified 22kg/m
3 as a threshold beyond which welfare problems are more likely to occur, and which we discussed at length on another thread. While they did not recommend a "single threshold stocking density that will ensure the welfare of the fish concerned," arguing that fish welfare, like so many other things, is dependent on many factors, they did, none the less, conclude that stocking density can have a negative effect on fish welfare, especially over their 22kg/m
3 threshold. It should also be noted that Turnbull et al., did conclude that the 15kg/m
3 maximum recommended by the FAWC was not supported by their findings, as a single threshold was "not the most effective way to ensure the welfare of farmed fish."
Sandman,
Please before you bail on us or anne, could define, in your words, high densities. Also, you stated that a farm "negates the natural order of things." Is this the basis of your position on salmon farming in BC?
The answer to the first question is above, as for the second question (about the above quoted statement which is also elaborated upon above), I believe this has been answered already in my many comments on many threads on this topic. However, in case it is not yet clear, no, my objection to farming Atlantic Salmon in open net pens in BC is not based on my claim that farms negate the natural order of things, although I am not sure how you could have thought that it was. Selective memory loss? Or just stirring the pot? I will say, however, that many of my objections do stem from the fact that the industry has to deal with this fact within an environmentally sensitive area. Remember the days when farmers could plow (and apply fertilizers and pesticides) right up to the stream bank? Could you imagine a pig farmer today dumping manure into the river? I know, an unfair comparison, but you get the idea. My position on salmon farming stems from the reality that the documented impacts of salmon farming and the remaining uncertainties surrounding its ecological risk means that decisions are being
based on uncertain or inadequate information. All I keep hearing from farm supporters is: "That was true before, back when we didn't know better, but now we know better and are doing it right." Well, what is the next learning curve going to bring? The risks are too great.
Author
Topic: Petition to restrain Alexandra Morton (gag order request) (Read 74734 times)