Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[troutbreath]

B.C. privacy commissioner rules sea lice records can't be concealed
 
 
By Larry Pynn, Vancouver SunMarch 1, 2010
 

 
Sea lice cover this pink salmon juvenile.
Photograph by: ..., Vancouver Sun filesEnvironmental groups claimed a victory Monday after the Office of the Information and Privacy Commissioner ruled that the Ministry of Agriculture and Lands can no longer conceal records of sea lice infestations at coastal salmon farms.

The battle for access to sea lice records, led by the T. Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation and Ecojustice, has been continuing since the ministry refused to release the information in 2004.

The ministry said it refused because fish farms supplied the information in confidence and because disclosure could harm the companies.

The new ruling acknowledges that release of the records may harm the reputations of salmon farms but held that the legislation does not protect companies from the public relations fallout from the public knowing about sea lice outbreaks.

The information must now be released within 30 days, provided that neither the ministry nor the salmon farm industry seeks a judicial review.

Clare Backman, spokesman for Marine Harvest, the province's largest salmon farmer, said the company now posts sea lice information on its website and has no plans to challenge the ruling. "It will be released and we're okay with that," he said.

Ministry officials were reviewing the decision before making a comment.

Salmon farms have long been accused of spreading sea lice to wild stocks.

The B.C. Pacific Salmon Forum found in 2009 that farmed and wild salmon can coexist, but recommended limits on salmon farming, including a cap on production in the Broughton Archipelago at current levels of 18,500 tonnes per year, and managing farms to meet sea-lice limits on young wild salmon.

lpynn@vancouversun.com

© Copyright (c) The Vancouver Sun

[skaha]

--"The ministry said it refused because fish farms supplied the information in confidence and because disclosure could harm the companies"

--My question to the Ministry would be-- Did they even ask? Or did they just assume the companies would object.
--The ministry is far to risk adverse.. The freedome of information act should be called the subversion of information act and the Min of Environment is the leader of the pack .

[IronNoggin]

Mark Hume
Vancouver, BC - Globe and Mail update
Published on Monday, Mar. 01, 2010 6:02PM EST Last updated on Tuesday, Mar. 02, 2010 4:41PM EST

After a four-year battle an environmental organization has won access to data collected by the British Columbia government on sea lice infestations in salmon farms.

In a ruling released today the Office of the Information & Privacy Commissioner of B.C. orders the release of information gathered during fish farm health audits.
The government had refused to release the data to the T. Buck Suzuki Environmental Foundation, saying the information was provided in confidence and disclosure could harm the farms.

But responding to an application made by Ecojustice, the Information & Privacy Commissioner ordered the Ministry of Agriculture and Lands to release the sea lice data.

Mainstream, one of the fish farming companies that objected to the release of the information, argued that if environmental groups "are in possession of information that would suggest or confirm the presence of pathogens and/or sea lice in any quantity, and particularly in significant quantities, it is clear that they would use this information to damage Mainstream's business."

Mainstream also argued critics could take the information out of context.

But the Information & Privacy Commissioner wasn't convinced by those arguments.

"Were this a basis for withholding records, one could easily envision very little information being disclosed by public bodies which are, in many cases, concerned how information might be used and viewed by members of the public. Possible misuse or distortion of material released under FIPPA [the Freedom of Information and Protection of Privacy Act] is not a basis for claiming an exception," the ruling states.

The government has 30 days to release the data."
..............................................................................

Good on the Privacy Commissioner for NOT catering to the Farms and their incessant denials. Only wish DFO would take a hint from this...

Nog

[lapetitebuse]

Mainstream, one of the fish farming companies that objected to the release of the information, argued that if environmental groups "are in possession of information that would suggest or confirm the presence of pathogens and/or sea lice in any quantity, and particularly in significant quantities, it is clear that they would use this information to damage Mainstream's business."

Does Mainstrean means "let us do business and not have to report to the public of any damage we do to our land"?
I think it is clear that they know the issue and the impact that sea lice have on juvenile salmon, and they are fine with hiding it.
What a lack of responsability!

[troutbreath]

Mainstream and other fishfarmers are probably financial contributors to the BC liberals. Nothing wrong with fish farming just do it in a viable way. These companies are not good for business. There just good for money to the Liberals or any host of unsavory politicians.

[chris gadsden]

Check out the new Common Sense Canadian web site that deals with this sea lice issue and other environmental concerns in BC. Rafe Mair is involved so you can be sure its hard hitting.


http://www.thecanadian.org/

[alwaysfishn]

Mainstream and other fishfarmers are probably financial contributors to the BC liberals. Nothing wrong with fish farming just do it in a viable way. These companies are not good for business. There just good for money to the Liberals or any host of unsavory politicians.

Banks and grocery stores make financial contributions to political parties as well.

The point is the fish farms are harming the environment. Governments allow these businesses because they are contributing tax dollars to the government coffers. Don't think for a moment that the NDP would change anything if they were in power. Statements like the above drive me nuts...   

If you want to make an effective argument stick to arguing the environmental impact. Everyone already knows that politicians are "unsavory".
What most people are unaware of is the damage that these businesses are doing.

Great website link Chris!