Fishing with Rod Discussion Forum
Fishing in British Columbia => Fishing-related Issues & News => Topic started by: chris gadsden on November 20, 2013, 08:06:13 AM
-
AYLOCK's
Wednesday, November 20, 2013
Feds Quarantine Fish Farms
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency has quarantined two Atlantic fish farms and ordered the destruction of tonnes of salmon to stem the spread of an infectious virus.
The agency confirmed thousands of fish must be destroyed at two aquaculture sites in Newfoundland & Labrador following outbreaks of infectious salmon anaemia. Inspectors would not divulge the volume of infected fish or name the company involved: “For privacy reasons the agency cannot reveal the name or specific locations of the facilities.”
However Blacklock’s determined between 1300 and 1700 tonnes of salmon at one fish farm, and up to 2000 tonnes at another, are to be destroyed.
The region’s largest fish farmer, Cook Aquaculture Inc., earlier acknowledged its Hermitage Bay, Nfld. facility was cited by federal inspectors for salmon anaemia. In a separate incident, Cooke confirmed that some 20,000 salmon escaped from its Hermitage Bay pens in September. Neither the company nor federal inspectors commented on whether infected fish were believed to have had contact with wild salmon.
“The Agency has placed movement control measures on the facilities to control movement of fish,” a Food Inspection Agency spokesperson said.
Scientists and researchers have cautioned that salmon anaemia in farmed fish poses a risk to wild populations.
An outbreak of the virus at a Cooke Aquaculture farm at Shelburne, N.S. led to the destruction of 140,000 salmon last February.
Scientists estimate the death rate for Atlantic salmon infected with the virus is nearly 90 percent, though the virus poses no risk to human health.
“Infectious salmon anaemia does pose risks to aquatic animal health and the economy,” noted the Inspection Agency, which estimated that 80 percent of the nation’s salmon catch, both wild and farmed stock, is sold for export.
By Paul Delahanty
-
Alexandra Morton 8:15am Nov 21
Well, well, well the aquaculture industry did not get the federal legislation they have been lobbying for - is there a backroom deal somewhere, or is the dirty little Norwegian salmon farming industry loosing its grip?
Thursday, November 21, 2013
There Oughta Be A Law
The Department of Fisheries is levying $815,000 in new fees on B.C. aquaculture but stopped short of proposing national legislation to standardize fish farming practices.
The department for the first time detailed a schedule of proposed fees for fish farmers, including a flat $100 charge for salmon producers with an additional “access to water” fee of $2.50 a tonne, to $5 per hectare for shellfish.
The federal department assumed regulation of commercial fish farming in British Columbia on Dec. 19, 2010 and has since attempted to draft a fee schedule.
“They consulted and it took years,” said Roberta Stevenson, executive director of the B.C. Shellfish Growers Association. “The bureaucracy is so overloaded and so slow that something as simple as charging $100 to operate took years to figure out. How are we supposed to make any progress on the real issues?”
Fisheries Minister Gail Shea did not comment.
Stevenson said the fees appeared modest, and likened the charges to a standard fishing license fee – “as if we are going out and catching cod,” she said. “We are farmers; we work yearlong. The system isn’t really fitting well for us, and until it does there will be no growth.”
Aquaculture in British Columbia alone is estimated at $534 million annually by federal regulators. Operators have appealed for stand-alone legislation to unify industry practices beyond amendments to the Fisheries Act.
“This process has highlighted the need for an aquaculture act,” said Colleen Dane, spokesperson for the B.C. Salmon Farmers Association.
The 2013 budget proposed a $57.5 million review of aquaculture regulations. The Canadian industry has grown 52 percent in the past decade to an estimated $2 billion annually.
Farmed salmon is B.C.’s largest single agricultural export, according to producers.
By Kaven Baker-Voakes BAYLOCKS http://www.blacklocks.ca/there-oughta-be-a-law
View Post on Facebook · Edit Email
-
http://www.protectwildscotland.org/salmon/salmon-news/call-for-cull-of-farmed-salmon/
-
http://7thspace.com/headlines/447365/infectious_salmon_anaemia_virus_isav_in_chilean_atlantic_salmon_salmo_salar_aquaculture_emergence_of_low_pathogenic_isav_hpr0_and_re_emergence_of_virulent_isav_hprdelta_hpr3_and_hpr14.html
-
http://7thspace.com/headlines/447365/infectious_salmon_anaemia_virus_isav_in_chilean_atlantic_salmon_salmo_salar_aquaculture_emergence_of_low_pathogenic_isav_hpr0_and_re_emergence_of_virulent_isav_hprdelta_hpr3_and_hpr14.html
Interesting stuff Chris but how is this relevant to BC salmon farming? ::)
-
I think Chris is posting it for a good reason.
A + B = C
Ie. if it goes down in one place seems pretty stupid to dismiss it, defend it, and not be too concerned about it in another 8)
-
Interesting stuff Chris but how is this relevant to BC salmon farming? ::)
Because disease mutates Dave.
http://www.wilsondisease.med.ualberta.ca/database.asp
-
Because disease mutates Dave.
http://www.wilsondisease.med.ualberta.ca/database.asp
True enough.
Diseases in man induced crops, animal and vegetable, have been happening since people began domesticating animals and planting seeds; disease is still common in most crops raised today, including people.
What's important to me, from where I sit on this fence, is that these farmed Atlantic's here in BC and in Washington appear to be robust and healthy, as have recent returns of Pacific salmon to most tributaries of the Fraser .
When we consider the really important issues coming up for wild salmon here in BC, (not Scotland, Ireland, Chile, or Newfoundland) these farms are low priority, but are a perfect scapegoat. JMO, of course :)
-
Because disease mutates Dave.
http://www.wilsondisease.med.ualberta.ca/database.asp
Wrong. It is not the disease that mutates - it is the genetic material that mutates. A mutation is the change in the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus or extrachromosomal genetic element. A disease is an abnormal condition that affects the body of an organism.
Let Google be your friend.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disease
-
Regardless of the disease, why would you want it show up at all, its been shown to be present in farms elsewhere,sadly isnt it only a matter of time before this ISA virus shows up here.It has shown up as close as Washington state where,they did a massive cull of all fish and has to sterilize all nets,etc.Not sure why but they seem to be more realistic and up front about whats going on with their fishfarms.
Everyone is focused on the fish farms, but we can control them,why wouldnt we do all possible to make sure they dont affect our wild stocks as well as other factors affecting our wild stocks.
-
Wrong. It is not the disease that mutates - it is the genetic material that mutates. A mutation is the change in the nucleotide sequence of the genome of an organism, virus or extrachromosomal genetic element. A disease is an abnormal condition that affects the body of an organism.
Let Google be your friend.....
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mutation
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disease
Eyem soorree, itts jest meye ignernt rednek bakgrownd end knot gooin two sum fancee skool two lern end gittin sum fancee edukashun. ;D
Whatever- mutations do happen and disease becomes resistant to "cures". That's a simple fact with no semantics.
And here's your gold star!
(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t82/Willy1956/gold-star-2-1-300x285_zps02970148.jpg) (http://s158.photobucket.com/user/Willy1956/media/gold-star-2-1-300x285_zps02970148.jpg.html)
-
Regardless of the disease, why would you want it show up at all, its been shown to be present in farms elsewhere,sadly isnt it only a matter of time before this ISA virus shows up here.It has shown up as close as Washington state where,they did a massive cull of all fish and has to sterilize all nets,etc.Not sure why but they seem to be more realistic and up front about whats going on with their fishfarms.
The cull you mention in Washington was a result of IHN, not ISA. ISA, the disease, has not been identified on the Pacific west coast. Strains of ISAv, or a virus very close have been found, and are according to DF0's Dr. Kristi Miller, likely endemic.
Bottom line is that this virus, whatever it turns out to be, has apparently no impact on either farmed Atlantics or Pacific salmon.
Please explain how are Washington State salmon farmers are more realistic and up front than those in BC?
-
Isa has a close to a 90% mortality rate on on atlantic salmon.This virus while endemic in sockeye salmon ,is not found in the epidemic proportions that it is found in farmed atlantic salmon.Not sure how you can make a statement like that ,no impact on either farmed atlantics or pacific salmon
The facts are as soon as the farms in Washington State found they had an epidemic, they immediately ordered the cull of their stocks.Its a American owned company,read "accountable",,not a foreign interest with no regard to environment other than greed.
The fact that they have a State Fish health Supervisor that is concerned for conservation speaks volumes.
Certainly different than the muzzled,overly politicized ,fumbling bureacrats that we have running our department .
-
Isa has a close to a 90% mortality rate on on atlantic salmon.This virus while endemic in sockeye salmon ,is not found in the epidemic proportions that it is found in farmed atlantic salmon.Not sure how you can make a statement like that ,no impact on either farmed atlantics or pacific salmon
The facts are as soon as the farms in Washington State found they had an epidemic, they immediately ordered the cull of their stocks.Its a American owned company,read "accountable",,not a foreign interest with no regard to environment other than greed.
The fact that they have a State Fish health Supervisor that is concerned for conservation speaks volumes.
Certainly different than the muzzled,overly politicized ,fumbling bureacrats that we have running our department .
I believe you have ISA confused with IHN.
If you are indicating that BC fish farms are unresponsive in these situations the facts state otherwise....
http://www2.canada.com/topics/travel/story.html?id=6640338
http://www.salmonfarmers.org/public-update-2-ihn-and-bc-salmon-farms
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/aquatic-animals/diseases/reportable/ihn/eng/1330122585767/1330122721075
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/aquatic-animals/diseases/reportable/ihn/fact-sheet/eng/1330124360826/1330124556262
-
True enough.
Quote from: shuswapsteve on November 23, 2013, 09:23:59 PM
Wrong. It is not the disease that mutates - it is the genetic material that mutates.
How about "foot in mouth disease", Dave? ::)
-
Quote from: shuswapsteve on November 23, 2013, 09:23:59 PM
Wrong. It is not the disease that mutates - it is the genetic material that mutates.
How about "foot in mouth disease", Dave? ::)
Yup, technically Steve is correct and again I learned something from his post. Do you have something to add to this discussion or are you just stirring the pot?
-
Oh just stirring the pot, thesawress Davey. I'm surprised you didn't chime in at your faux pas. Kinda hoping it would go away?
-
Finally got back on FWR ... you must be proud.
-
Proud of what? I pay my taxes...like most people. How about you?
-
Yup, technically Steve is correct and again I learned something from his post. Do you have something to add to this discussion or are you just stirring the pot?
Not directed towards you at all, Dave.
-
http://www.ctvnews.ca/canada/large-b-c-fish-farm-firm-still-focused-on-atlantic-salmon-despite-economic-shift-1.1568412#ixzz2mAeBhnbf
-
From the article:
Justice Bruce Cohen found in his report on the collapse of the Fraser River sockeye run in 2009 that the fish faced a "likelihood of harm" from disease and pathogens on farms, especially in the Discovery Islands northeast of Campbell River, between Vancouver Island and the province's mainland.
Did he really say this in the report or is this another "creative interpretation"?
-
I believe you have ISA confused with IHN.
If you are indicating that BC fish farms are unresponsive in these situations the facts state otherwise....
http://www2.canada.com/topics/travel/story.html?id=6640338
http://www.salmonfarmers.org/public-update-2-ihn-and-bc-salmon-farms
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/aquatic-animals/diseases/reportable/ihn/eng/1330122585767/1330122721075
http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/aquatic-animals/diseases/reportable/ihn/fact-sheet/eng/1330124360826/1330124556262
I did have the 2 infectious diseases mixed,my bad, but the point remains the same about the response of both the Washington State Fish supervisor and the fish farm that they immediately ordered the cull for conservation reasons.
The bc fish farms,(which is a massive misnomer as a large amount of them are owned by Norweigan interests) on the other hand ordered the cull after there stock was deemed to infected, these fish cannot be sold for quality reasons which has nothing to do with conservation but more to do with profit.
-
The enclosed press update includes:
"The yes ministers: Scottish Government 'is in bed with the fish-farming industry'" (The Sunday Herald, 1 December)
"Looking more than a little dodgy: a message for the government agencies dealing with salmon farms" (Alexandra Morton, 30 November)
"Large B.C. fish-farm firm still focused on Atlantic salmon despite economic shift" (CTV News, 30 November)
"Vote for social and ecological justice -- against Marine Harvest" (Women and Life on Earth internet project, 29 November)
"Galway Bay salmon farm halted as EU concerned by ‘Fundamental errors’ in scientific data" (Galway Advertiser, 28 November)
"Marine pollution by fish farms set to increase six-fold" (Environmental Research Web, 28 November)
"Canada approves GM salmon eggs: Conservation NGOs cry foul - and fear for the future of the species" (The Ecologist, 28 November)
"Scottish Salmon Company revenues and profits drop" (Intrafish, 28 November)
"EU blow for salmon farm" (Galway Independent, 27 November)
"To promote fish farm as job creation scheme is galling" (Galway Independent, 27 November)
"Edinburgh Protest & Visit to First Minister of Scotland!" (Protect Wild Scotland, 27 November)
"Welcome to reality" (Conservation Council for New Brunswick, 25 November)
Keep up to date on salmon farming news via: http://www.protectwildscotland.org/salmon/salmon-news/
Sign onto a letter to the First Minister of Scotland calling for a moratorium on salmon farming - to be delivered on 5 December in Edinburgh - online here
Best fishes,
Don
Don Staniford
Director, Protect Wild Scotland: www.protectwildscotland.org
<((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>¸.
·´¯`·.¸. , . .·´¯`·.. ><((((º>`·.¸¸.·´¯`·.¸.·´¯`·...¸><((((º>
The Sunday Herald, 1 December 2013
-
Judging from Don's and Doc Morton's track record, both appear to like leading with the chin rather than what is in the cavity behind it. :)
-
Kinda like you huh, butt hurt bawb? Do you have a life?
-
I did have the 2 infectious diseases mixed,my bad, but the point remains the same about the response of both the Washington State Fish supervisor and the fish farm that they immediately ordered the cull for conservation reasons.
The bc fish farms,(which is a massive misnomer as a large amount of them are owned by Norweigan interests) on the other hand ordered the cull after there stock was deemed to infected, these fish cannot be sold for quality reasons which has nothing to do with conservation but more to do with profit.
I understand your point remains the same, but it is still false. I am also wondering what you know about IHN.
In the most recent outbreak of IHN at Mainstream's Dixon Bay farm in 2012 was first discovered during routine testing. Samples were immediately sent to a third party lab (Provincial Animal Health Lab in Abbottsford) where PCR testing showed the presence of the IHN virus. IHN is a reportable disease in Canada. This means that fish farming companies in Canada, including Mainstream, are required by law to immediately notify the CFIA (even if they only suspect it)- which they did. However, based on prior experience from the 2003 IHN outbreak, Mainstream knew that they could not wait for CFIA confirmation results which could take up to 2 weeks, so the decision was made to depopulate 500,000 Atlantic Salmon immediately - before the confirmation results were known. This was in the news article I attached previously. Fish farmers here in BC learned after 2003 that they needed to act quickly to maintain biosecurity by preventing the spread of the virus to other farms by boats, shared personnel or shared contractors. Thus, your contention that BC fish farms ordered the cull after their stock was deemed infected is false because Mainstream carried out the cull before any confirmation from the CFIA.
This is really not much different from what potato farmers do when potato blight is suspected. My late father-in-law was potato farmer back in New Brunswick. The concern is not just for the farmer that has potato blight in his crops, but for the other immediate farms in the area that do not. There is machinery and workers constantly being moved around from field to field which poses a high risk of infection if potato blight is present. To prevent the spread to other farms, the farmer with potato blight (even suspected) may burn a large portion of their fields. They are not making money if they are burning their fields and not harvesting the potatoes from it because of potato blight or some other disease.
The reason that the fish were culled because of “profit” is not only false, but it makes no sense because the fish are much more valuable if they are healthy. Mainstream already addressed this myth from Mr. Reid who is so clueless it is actually funny. As for conservation purposes, you should understand that IHNv is an endemic virus to our coast, from Alaska to California. Wild Pacific Salmon, such as Sockeye, can carry the virus their whole lives without experiencing the disease – IHN; however, in dense situations like hatcheries, the virus can cause disease in salmon fry. On the other hand, Atlantic Salmon have not developed the natural resistance to IHNv like Pacific Salmon. IHN is highly lethal to Atlantic Salmon.
-
I like the term "depopulate" sounds better than destroy I guess. ::)
-
"Because of the recreational and commercial value of Pacific Northwest salmon and trout species, aquaculture (fish farming) and fish hatchery facilities have been used for over a century to increase and supplement natural production. Salmon farming in saltwater is a minor part of the national aquaculture industry, but it is a valuable economic asset, contributing 11 percent to the total value of all aquaculture products. Farmed salmon now accounts for 80 percent of all salmon sold in the United States."
http://agsci.oregonstate.edu/aquatic-bt/book/export/html/65
-
"Because of the recreational and commercial value of Pacific Northwest salmon and trout species, aquaculture (fish farming) and fish hatchery facilities have been used for over a century to increase and supplement natural production. Salmon farming in saltwater is a minor part of the national aquaculture industry, but it is a valuable economic asset, contributing 11 percent to the total value of all aquaculture products. Farmed salmon now accounts for 80 percent of all salmon sold in the United States."
http://agsci.oregonstate.edu/aquatic-bt/book/export/html/65
Fisherbob
Sr. Member
****
Re: Salmon Confidential
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
You guys just do not get it. I want the salmon feedlots out of BC. I have donated to this cause and said so when asked. Did any of you? No. Just smart remarks. Thanks guys. All I have said, what is the good of getting the feedlots out of BC and letting Washington grow them. If we anti-feedlot people can not see this problem it will be the last we see of our wild stocks. Is that not what we care about for generations to come. We have to look out side the box we are given.
« Last Edit: March 16, 2013, 09:11:44 PM by Fisherbob »
??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ??? ???........ ::)
-
Once again MB, please excuse me for no longer being a loyal listener on your side of the fence. :)
-
What is my side of the fence, flip flop bawb? Are you going to tell me you don't believe in Santa Claus anymore? *sobs*
-
What is my side of the fence, flip flop bawb? Are you going to tell me you don't believe in Santa Claus anymore? *sobs*
" the difference between stupidity and genius is that genius has its limits."
Albert Einstein. :)
-
Because disease mutates Dave.
This post needs a comma :)
Or, not knowing Dave personally, maybe it doesn't...
-
LOL! :D
-
I understand your point remains the same, but it is still false. I am also wondering what you know about IHN.
In the most recent outbreak of IHN at Mainstream's Dixon Bay farm in 2012 was first discovered during routine testing. Samples were immediately sent to a third party lab (Provincial Animal Health Lab in Abbottsford) where PCR testing showed the presence of the IHN virus. IHN is a reportable disease in Canada. This means that fish farming companies in Canada, including Mainstream, are required by law to immediately notify the CFIA (even if they only suspect it)- which they did. However, based on prior experience from the 2003 IHN outbreak, Mainstream knew that they could not wait for CFIA confirmation results which could take up to 2 weeks, so the decision was made to depopulate 500,000 Atlantic Salmon immediately - before the confirmation results were known. This was in the news article I attached previously. Fish farmers here in BC learned after 2003 that they needed to act quickly to maintain biosecurity by preventing the spread of the virus to other farms by boats, shared personnel or shared contractors. Thus, your contention that BC fish farms ordered the cull after their stock was deemed infected is false because Mainstream carried out the cull before any confirmation from the CFIA.
This is really not much different from what potato farmers do when potato blight is suspected. My late father-in-law was potato farmer back in New Brunswick. The concern is not just for the farmer that has potato blight in his crops, but for the other immediate farms in the area that do not. There is machinery and workers constantly being moved around from field to field which poses a high risk of infection if potato blight is present. To prevent the spread to other farms, the farmer with potato blight (even suspected) may burn a large portion of their fields. They are not making money if they are burning their fields and not harvesting the potatoes from it because of potato blight or some other disease.
The reason that the fish were culled because of “profit” is not only false, but it makes no sense because the fish are much more valuable if they are healthy. Mainstream already addressed this myth from Mr. Reid who is so clueless it is actually funny. As for conservation purposes, you should understand that IHNv is an endemic virus to our coast, from Alaska to California. Wild Pacific Salmon, such as Sockeye, can carry the virus their whole lives without experiencing the disease – IHN; however, in dense situations like hatcheries, the virus can cause disease in salmon fry. On the other hand, Atlantic Salmon have not developed the natural resistance to IHNv like Pacific Salmon. IHN is highly lethal to Atlantic Salmon.
My point is that the American producers are more accountable for the health of their industry,not sure why they import so much from us which, I find to be questionable ,health wise.
As for potatoes?
There is a HUGE different between a domestically produced vegetable crop thats been farmed domestically for hundreds of years and a wild seafood stock , where we are still finding out the negative effects on their survival rate from year to year.
I understand the concept of disease and know it was only made to illustrate.
The cull of these fish earlier without waiting means that they would not have to continue feeding them for 2 weeks while they wait for confirmation from CFIA which they surely already know will be the outcome or directive.It also gives them 2 weeks head start over a new stock of salmon.Ultimately time is money and savings on feed and growing time is valuable for this business.
You just made the point as well about this virus being epidemic in the Atlantic farm stocks ,why would any one want this??
I too like the term "depopulate" ,I suppose cull is a sanitized term as well,both mean killing .It sounds better in the media and on TV . Kind of Bush-era spin ,collateral damage,etc.
-
My point is that the American producers are more accountable for the health of their industry,not sure why they import so much from us which, I find to be questionable ,health wise.
This may help you out. :)
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/management-gestion/index-eng.htm
A comparison between countries.
http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/cabinet/Summary_Table_BC-World_Aqua_Regs.pdf
I seem to have a problem finding The American regulations. Can you help me out? :)
-
Can you help me out? :)
Not qualified in that field, try the yellow pages.
-
A comparison between countries.
http://www.agf.gov.bc.ca/fisheries/cabinet/Summary_Table_BC-World_Aqua_Regs.pdf
I don't believe anything written by our Government !!!
-
Looks like the Americans lost out on this one LOL. :)
http://www.creativesalmon.com/_docs/Creative-Salmon-Achieves-Organic-Certification.pdf
Go Canada :)
-
My point is that the American producers are more accountable for the health of their industry,not sure why they import so much from us which, I find to be questionable ,health wise.
As for potatoes?
There is a HUGE different between a domestically produced vegetable crop thats been farmed domestically for hundreds of years and a wild seafood stock , where we are still finding out the negative effects on their survival rate from year to year.
I understand the concept of disease and know it was only made to illustrate.
The cull of these fish earlier without waiting means that they would not have to continue feeding them for 2 weeks while they wait for confirmation from CFIA which they surely already know will be the outcome or directive.It also gives them 2 weeks head start over a new stock of salmon.Ultimately time is money and savings on feed and growing time is valuable for this business.
You just made the point as well about this virus being epidemic in the Atlantic farm stocks ,why would any one want this??
I too like the term "depopulate" ,I suppose cull is a sanitized term as well,both mean killing .It sounds better in the media and on TV . Kind of Bush-era spin ,collateral damage,etc.
First thing I noticed about your argument is that it has changed from the industry here not acting quickly enough to cull infected Atlantic Salmon (as compared to the Americans) to now culling these fish earlier than CFIA confirmation so it will give them a head start raising more salmon in the ocean. Which is it?
However, that aside, you are again incorrect about the reasons why the cull was done earlier. The early depopulation or cull was done to prevent the spread of the IHN virus to nearby farms and becoming a larger problem – it was not to give them a 2 week head start. I agree that time is money, but losing stock is money also. In the outbreaks that occurred between 2001 and 2003, it was found that the IHN virus spread from infected farms to non-infected farms. Evidence showed that farming practices (boats, personnel, etc.) contributed significantly to this spread. According the literature I have provided, there can be a steep rise in mortality from IHN on a fish farm before clinical signs are noticed. Once Atlantic Salmon become infected and show clinical signs of IHN, the disease can already have taken a hold of the farm in question. Experience from this past outbreak period showed that farms were following the wrong sequence of action by increasing biosecurity and isolating farms after official confirmation (which can take 2 to 3 weeks). Instead, a more pre-emptive approach to cull after initial suspicion or results appears to be a better approach to prevent the loss of stock at nearby farms.
This leads into my example with potato farming. Although I agree with you that we are still finding out the negative effects on the survival wild fish from year to year you missed my point regarding how potato farming relates, so I will clarify. With potato farms being relatively located very close together as well as personnel and equipment moving within and between different farms the spread of disease (in this case Potato Blight) can be very rapid and devastating. This is why it is not uncommon for farmers there to take immediate action to burn portions of their fields to stop the spread – which is parallel to what fish farmers did in 2012 with a cull. Potatoes may be a domesticated produced vegetable, but they are prone to diseases as much as aquaculture finfish or shellfish.
One thing I have learned is that Atlantic Salmon are not introduced immediately after a disease outbreak or epidemic such as IHN. It can be as long as 6 months before fish are reintroduced into seawater. A period of cleaning and fallowing follow restocking. It probably would not be a wise move to quickly put fish into the water if the presence of the IHN virus is still suspected. In addition, the young fish that are introduced to the seawater likely have to be a certain size and maturity before that step is done. As for knowing what “is valuable for this business” I am interested in knowing what you actually know about the business.
To clarify, the IHN virus is endemic to our coast; but outbreaks or epidemics of the disease (IHN) can occur in Atlantic Salmon who have no natural resistance. What I said was that IHN is highly lethal to Atlantic Salmon. This can happen when there is an epidemic or outbreak. Despite this, IHN disease events with Atlantic Salmon in BC fish farms are actually rare. There is no continuous IHN epidemic going on right now with Atlantic Salmon here unless you have heard something new in the news recently. I have pretty much said all I can on this subject in this thread now. At this point I would appreciate if you could show me some actual facts to support your argument – specifically your knowledge of the business here in your latest post. If you can I will be more persuaded to believe you.
http://www.int-res.com/articles/dao2006/72/d072p213.pdf
-
Steve are you as long winded socially? Cut to the chase and be concise for the sake of clarity. Your pandering makes for bad reading. End up losing interest in what your trying to get across, by your verbosity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_to_the_chase
-
The argument/discussion/response was brought up only in response to your news article that you mentioned about the fish farm culling their salmon 2 weeks earlier.This is only 1 farm doing this and to me seems opportunistic at best, not because they care for the environment where the fish are raised outside their own business.
I dont disagree with you about the quarantine and sterilization of all the boats,nets,equipement that needs to be done after an infection takes place.Surely this is best for all involved .
As for our regulations being stricter, they would certainly have to be especially since you are introducing a foreign species into an environment with what seems to be a healthy wild stock and thriving industry that it supports.
I dont profess to know everthing on this subject but do not support foreign fish farms in Canadian waters.
When i go to dinner I always ask where the fish is from and what type, any hint of frankenfish and I have the chicken thanks!
Always enjoy a lively debate!
Looks like the Americans lost out on this one LOL. :)
http://www.creativesalmon.com/_docs/Creative-Salmon-Achieves-Organic-Certification.pdf
Go Canada :)
Kudos to Creative Salmon, a canadian company raising native salmon for local markets, which I think people are better educated and aware of nowadays in our environment of GMO foods,but ,thats another discussion for another day.
-
Interesting company but how is rearing local fish much better than Atlantic in terms of it's effects on wild stock? I think this is what most of us on this site are concerned about. We don't much care how organic the farmed stuff is because we do not eat farmed salmon. While it might be considered organic by fish farming standards, do these standards include any consideration of present wild stock?
It seems to me that whenever you gather a large number of salmon in one place and in large numbers (ie. a net pen) you vastly increase the risk of creating large amounts of disease. Whether it's Chinook or Atlantic they still risk spreading disease to wild stock.
-
Interesting company but how is rearing local fish much better than Atlantic in terms of it's effects on wild stock? I think this is what most of us on this site are concerned about. We don't much care how organic the farmed stuff is because we do not eat farmed salmon. While it might be considered organic by fish farming standards, do these standards include any consideration of present wild stock?
It seems to me that whenever you gather a large number of salmon in one place and in large numbers (ie. a net pen) you vastly increase the risk of creating large amounts of disease. Whether it's Chinook or Atlantic they still risk spreading disease to wild stock.
Diseases most certainly happen in all concentrated gatherings of fish, poultry, beef, pork, sheep, elk, rabbits, etc, etc, and … people. Want to get sick? Go to a local clinic; people sneezing, kids coughing god knows what, spreading to already possibly compromised people (after all, mostly that's why they're there).
BCs federal and provincial fish hatcheries, as well as our near natural spawning channels, are no exception to disease outbreaks; last year's Chilliwack River steelhead juveniles are a good example. Perhaps do some research to see how many fish stocks anglers covet that are treated with fungicides and antibiotics while in captivity. I can verify that every year 45 gal of full strength formalin was used to treat 250 Cultus Lake sockeye used for broodstock. Extrapolate that over all BCs hatcheries… go further and check out the disease prevention protocols for the monstrous Alaskan salmon ranching industry.
The good news is all these farms, ranches, hatcheries … all sites that raise animals, learn from past mistakes and continually do so because they must to compete in today's economy.
-
Re: salmon farm organic certification
This is a company that does and has not used antibiotics for just about 10 years. If disease was such an intense issue how possibly could a company achieve a survival rate higher than 90% over two years of a cycle for each cycle all these years? Interestingly this 90% survival rate is very similar to companies that do use antibiotics. Go figure.
-
Well, well...thesawrus Davey and his attempt at rhetoric. So tell us Davey how is it that Cultus Sockeye broodstock are coveted by anglers? You insinuate that these fish are given a full strength bath in this 45 gallon drum of formalin which could not be further from the truth. They are on a slow drip rate once a week into the holding tanks which are constantly gravity fed with Cultus Lake water. This is to control copepods and works quite well. That 45 gallon drum of formalin has other user groups not just broodstock use. And great care is taken so there is no escapement of these brood fish into Sweltzer Creek or Cultus Lk. so no interaction between treated brood sox and lake spawners unlike farmed Chinooks escaping and spawning with other Chinook populations. So cancel your extrapolation rhetoric and fear mongering about Alaska. Get them in land based closed containment.
-
Thanks for clarifying Moosebreath. 8) Dave sure was trying stir up some of that stuff under then netpen. :P
-
Thanks for clarifying Moosebreath. 8) Dave sure was trying stir up some of that stuff under then netpen. :P
But, but....TB...Dave told me the tides take it away.....LOL...where I wonder, Dave.
-
Steve are you as long winded socially? Cut to the chase and be concise for the sake of clarity. Your pandering makes for bad reading. End up losing interest in what your trying to get across, by your verbosity.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cut_to_the_chase
Don't read it. Simple.
http://www.thefreedictionary.com/whining
-
Well, well...thesawrus Davey and his attempt at rhetoric. So tell us Davey how is it that Cultus Sockeye broodstock are coveted by anglers? You insinuate that these fish are given a full strength bath in this 45 gallon drum of formalin which could not be further from the truth. They are on a slow drip rate once a week into the holding tanks which are constantly gravity fed with Cultus Lake water. This is to control copepods and works quite well. That 45 gallon drum of formalin has other user groups not just broodstock use. And great care is taken so there is no escapement of these brood fish into Sweltzer Creek or Cultus Lk. so no interaction between treated brood sox and lake spawners unlike farmed Chinooks escaping and spawning with other Chinook populations. So cancel your extrapolation rhetoric and fear mongering about Alaska. Get them in land based closed containment.
Read my post again. I did not suggest Cultus sockeye are coveted by anglers; my reference to the formalin used to treat these 250 fish is but a drop in the bucket compared to the treatments for bacterial and fungal diseases used in West Coast hatcheries for steelhead, coho, chinook, kokanee, char and rainbow trout.
Who knows what Alaska uses but considering their output is in the billions of fish, I would suggest a considerable amount.
We are now done moosebreath. No further responses from me.
-
Escapes from salmon farms are beginning to be a thing of the past through technology and regulation.
How is the formalin removed from the water if the hatchery is a flow through system?
-
Read my post again. I did not suggest Cultus sockeye are coveted by anglers; my reference to the formalin used to treat these 250 fish is but a drop in the bucket compared to the treatments for bacterial and fungal diseases used in West Coast hatcheries for steelhead, coho, chinook, kokanee, char and rainbow trout.
Who knows what Alaska uses but considering their output is in the billions of fish, I would suggest a considerable amount.
We are now done moosebreath. No further responses from me.
You must have some kind of idea, Davey or is it just another uneducated opinion? Remember, people who live in glass houses.
-
Read my post again. I did not suggest Cultus sockeye are coveted by anglers; my reference to the formalin used to treat these 250 fish is but a drop in the bucket compared to the treatments for bacterial and fungal diseases used in West Coast hatcheries for steelhead, coho, chinook, kokanee, char and rainbow trout.
Who knows what Alaska uses but considering their output is in the billions of fish, I would suggest a considerable amount.
We are now done moosebreath. No further responses from me.
Typical of MB to listen to the words he is putting in your mouth Dave rather than listening to what you have said.
-
Escapes from salmon farms are beginning to be a thing of the past through technology and regulation.
How is the formalin removed from the water if the hatchery is a flow through system?
I'll let Davey answer that, aqua. ::)
-
I'll let Davey answer that, aqua. ::)
I'd like to here it from you actually MB?
-
Typical of MB to listen to the words he is putting in your mouth Dave rather than listening to what you have said.
These not your flip flop words, bawb?
"Every thing that Dr. Morton predicted has come to be true. I am sure we can get more donations her way if we bang the table louder and make more noise."
-
hey soxy.
davesolon isn't a planet though it's nice to know your thinking of me.
-
It certainly would be a barren one.
-
These not your flip flop words, bawb?
"Every thing that Dr. Morton predicted has come to be true. I am sure we can get more donations her way if we bang the table louder and make more noise."
Yes they were MB. No need to get all huffy and getting your shorts in a knot about it little one. If you cared to listen before, I told you I no longer support Doc Morton. Get off the bong for awhile and try to catch up Don. :). When you do, tell me what Morton has got right.
-
Re: salmon farm organic certification
This is a company that does and has not used antibiotics for just about 10 years. If disease was such an intense issue how possibly could a company achieve a survival rate higher than 90% over two years of a cycle for each cycle all these years? Interestingly this 90% survival rate is very similar to companies that do use antibiotics. Go figure.
This from another board...
Unless something has recently changed, Creative Salmon holds licenses for six fish farms and is owned by five private investors. Its shares are evenly split between three Japanese and two BC owners. Anyone want to call a company three-fifths Japanese and two-fifths BC "locally owned?" That is a matter of interpretation.
Even without any publicized escapements, you still have what is called ”leaching” where some fish just go missing from those open net pens. Their certainly is the possibility of propagation of those genetically inferior salmon with wild Chinook. I would actually take any Atlantic salmon feedlot over any company raising any kind of Pacific salmon in open net pens for that reason alone. Meaning the risk is to great to the genetics of the wild stocks and there should be NO genetically weakened Pacific salmon ever allowed in any “open net pen” – EVER!
HOWEVER, Creative Salmon has another VERY big issue. It is called Norwegian ISAv causing their Chinook to turn jaundice and "DIE"! Think about this for a moment… They only raise Chinook salmon from their own broad stock. Creative Salmon Chinook have already been diagnosed with the Norwegians strain of ISAv! Creative Salmon very well could be actually growing their very own version of the Norwegian ISAvirus; and “may” actually now be passing it down generation to generation through their very own eggs; and “may” be passing that disease to the wild! Kind of explains all those dead jaundice salmon starting to turn up in BC, doesn’t it?
“Dr. Miller said the ISA virus has now been confirmed in numerous wild fish, and in chinook samples provided by Creative Salmon, a fish farm on Vancouver Island.”
“Dr. Miller said her tests found a virus that is 95-per-cent similar to the European strain of ISA, which has infected farmed Atlantic salmon in Norway, Scotland, Atlantic Canada and Chile.” With “open net pens” they aren’t playing with dynamite - they are playing with nitroglycerin! You might as well go out and find a bottle of nitroglycerin and stick it your trunk, drive around, and wait for it to blow. That is exactly what they are doing with all those open net pens in BC concerning the Pacific salmon. And, it will blow!
So, I must ask… is anyone really okay with any type of salmon “open net pens,” especially on wild salmon migration routes? To include, Creative Salmon growing Chinook salmon that can interbred? And… with already known Creative Salmon has their very own Norwegian ISAv? And disease already killing their own Chinook salmon? And those Chinook swimming around intermingling with your wild BC wild salmon?
Concerning their “organic certification” all one has to do is look at who pushed that “organic certification” through! Ever heard of the “fox in the henhouse”?
Executive Director - Ruth Salmon (fitting last name, isn’t it?)
Board of Directors
Clare Backman, Marine Harvest Canada
Jonathan Barry, Breviro Caviar Inc.
Chris Beattie, Skretting Canada
Shelley King, Aquaculture Association of Canada
Jerry Bidgood, Prince Edward Aqua Farms Ltd.
Cyr Couturier, Newfoundland Aquaculture Industry Association / Marine Institute, Memorial University of Newfoundland
Steve Cross, Kyuquot SEAfoods Ltd.
Linda Duncan, Mussel Industry Council of North America
Terry Ennis, Atlantic Aqua Farms Inc.
Jason Mann, EWOS Canada Ltd.
Ann Worth, PEI Aquaculture Alliance
Nell Halse, Cooke Aquaculture Ltd.
Angela Bishop, Aquaculture Association of Nova Scotia
Stewart Hawthorn, Grieg Seafood BC Ltd.
Pamela Parker, Atlantic Canada Fish Farmers Association
John Rose, Icy Waters Ltd.
Roberta Stevenson, BC Shellfish Grower's Association
Stephen Stewart, Confederation Cove Mussels Ltd.
Karen Tracey, Northern Ontario Aquaculture Association
Fernando Villarroel, Mainstream Canada
Mary Ellen Walling, BC Salmon Farmers Association
Brian Yip, Fanny Bay Oysters
Board of Directors Executive
President - Clare Backman, Marine Harvest Canada
Vice-President - Terry Ennis, Atlantic Aqua Farms Inc.
Treasurer - Cyr Couturier, Marine Institute, Memorial University of Newfoundland
Secretary - Pam Parker, Atlantic Canada Fish Farmers Association
Executive Members-at-large
John Rose, Icy Waters Arctic Charr
Laurie Jensen, Mainstream Canada
-
Escapes from salmon farms are beginning to be a thing of the past through technology and regulation.
I should hope so after this fairly high number....pathetic.
"In 2006, the worst year on record, 921,000 farmed salmon escaped, according to the Norwegian Fisheries Directorate."
http://america.aljazeera.com/articles/2013/11/18/norwegian-salmonfarmoffersbountyforescapedfish.html
-
http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/2013/12/it-is-official-the-cfia-never-retested-my-samples.html
-
http://www.mainstream-group.com/portal/wps/wcm/connect/msca-content-en/mainstream-canada/news/conflict-and-criticism/critic+spins+tale+about+isa+virus+but+leaves+out+significant+facts
-
[quote author=moosebreath link=topic=34512.msg330351#msg330351 date=1386357
So, I must ask… is anyone really okay with any type of salmon “open net pens,” especially on wild salmon migration routes? To include, Creative Salmon growing Chinook salmon that can interbred? And… with already known Creative Salmon has their very own Norwegian ISAv? And disease already killing their own Chinook salmon? And those Chinook swimming around intermingling with your wild BC wild salmon?
[/quote]
How would that be different than a hatchery raised chinook interbreeding with a wild chinook?Has this ISA outbreak been been confirmed,if it has, isn't it law that they must cull their stock?
To me at least its a native species that is here,and does not pose the invasive species risk that is happening all over the world.
-
Dont believe everything you read on blogs salmonrook ;) ISA, the disease, has not been found in BC or Washington State
-
http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/2013/12/it-is-official-the-cfia-never-retested-my-samples.html
thats nice the feds never re tested then CFIA urged the OIE to suspend the Kibenge lab because "government labs couldn’t replicate his results."
-
Already presented in this thread:
http://www.fishingwithrod.com/yabbse/index.php?topic=32635.0
(page 30)
As for Dr. Miller's discovery of the ISA virus in Chinook samples provided by Creative Salmon there is more to that story than what you have portrayed. First, the Dr. Miller's study of the ISA virus in those fish also found that the prevalence of that virus was the same in healthy fish as it was in sick fish. Second, the results from that study were linked to a data from a licenced veterinarian sampled the fish and a board certified veterinary pathologist that examine sections of organs under a microscope. This way it was obvious to see that the sick fish were sick and the healthy fish were healthy. This suggests that whatever Dr. Miller was finding was not the cause of disease in those Chinook Salmon. (Cohen Exhibit #2078)
To add to this:
Attempts to replicate these findings by the CFIA National Reference Laboratory for ISA in Moncton, New Brunswick, were unsuccessful (Cohen Exhibit # 2004). In addition, all the experts (Dr. Nylund, Dr. Kibenge, Dr. Miller and Ms. Gagne) during the ISA testimony at the Cohen Commission Inquiry were unanimous in declaring that we have no evidence of ISA in BC (Cohen Final Report; Vol. 2, Ch. 4. Pg 80).
Kind of explains all those dead jaundice salmon starting to turn up in BC, doesn’t it?
Really? In 1999, Dr. Kibenge isolated a strain of ISAV from eastern Canada in farmed Coho Salmon from Chile which did not have clinical signs of ISA (Kibenge et al. 2001). It was shown that the fish had a disease characterized by jaundice which continues to occur in Chile without any evidence of ISAv (Smith et al 2006). This finding supports Dr. Kibenge’s conclusion that his ISAv findings in these farmed Coho “might have been coincidental” (Cohen Exhibit #2086).
Lastly, from the University of PEI Atlantic Veterinary College website:
“It is important to note that the presence of ISAv sequences in tissue samples does not necessarily mean that the actual disease, ISA, is present in the subject fish or that ISA is present in the area where the fish were collected,” said Dr. Kibenge. “Viral material can be present in animals without them actually having the associated disease. In order to confirm whether an infectious viral disease is present, further testing is required.”
The OIE definition (confirmation) of ISAv infection requires that the virus be successfully grown in cell culture. Thus, the PCR test should be viewed as a highly sensitive screening test that, if positive, is only the first diagnostic step in documenting an ISAv infection, should one exist.
http://avc.upei.ca/dr-fred-kibenge-invited-testify-bc-salmon-inquiry
References:
Kibenge FSB, Garate ON, Johnson G, Arriagada R, Kibenge MJT, Wadowska D (2001 ). Isolation and identification of infectious salmon anaemia virus (ISAV) from Coho salmon in Chile. Dis. Aquat. Org. 45:9-18
Smith PA, Larenas J, Contreras J, Cassigoli J, Venegas C, Rojas ME, Guajardo A, Perez S, Diaz S (2006). Infectious haemolytic anaemia causes jaundice outbreaks in seawater-cultured coho salmon, Oncorhynchus kisutch (Walbaum), in Chile. J. Fish Dis. 29:709-715
-
shteve it still looks like a smear job against Morton. A shut the f up or will disqualify the lab and all the people involved. Bad cricket old boy. You might be OK with it but others would prefer something less Machiavellian.
-
Don't read it. Simple.
Probably the shortest to the point you've posted. ;D kudos
-
shteve it still looks like a smear job against Morton. A shut the f up or will disqualify the lab and all the people involved. Bad cricket old boy. You might be OK with it but others would prefer something less Machiavellian.
So TB, how would you deal with this?
-
Be straight forward in the first place. Like saying it's an indicator of a possible problem. Not shut down/slander other labs for presenting what they have found.
-
shteve it still looks like a smear job against Morton. A shut the f up or will disqualify the lab and all the people involved. Bad cricket old boy. You might be OK with it but others would prefer something less Machiavellian.
Smear job?? It is good to be somewhat skeptical and I realize that a person like you would be, so that is why I provided actual references to the information. Feel free to check them out including the complete comment from the AVC (the lab that was apparently slandered) if you do not believe me. If ISA was found in these farmed Chinook salmon from Creative then please show me. Are Dr. Nylund, Dr. Kibenge and Dr. Miller wrong in their assessment of ISA? They are saying something different from Ms Morton.
-
Hey TB because you replied in a respectful manner I did a little digging for you to help you understand what Miller said and what she did not in regards to those Creative farmed Chinook. This is all found in either the Cohen transcripts or the Cohen Final Report. In a nutshell, Dr. Miller believes that she found something that is ISAv or ISAv-like and that although it is not proven to cause mortality or disease in these farmed Chinook it appears elicit to a flu-like response in them (preliminary). It does not mean that Dr. Miller's work was incorrect; instead, it could mean that an asymptomatic ISA-like virus has existed off our coast for some time. This is what some of her retrospective work suggests.
Dr. Miller went on to say that, although the populations of fish from which she sampled may not be suffering disease and mortality related to ISA, there is a biologically consistent, flu-like response in them to whatever it is she is detecting with the ISA segment 7 test.(Justice Bruce Cohen; Cohen Final Report; Vol. 1, Ch. 9, pg. 465)
DR. MILLER: So it's biologically consistent that they are responding to a virus that causes an influenza kind of response. That's not to say that they're suffering disease and mortality. Cohen Transcript; Dec 15, 2011. Page 87-88
Dr. Miller's response to whether ISAv is here or not:
DR. MILLER: I wouldn't disagree with that. I mean, I think that I clearly believe that there is a virus here that is very similar to ISA virus in Europe, but we really do need to get a fuller sequence to get more information about how similar it is, given the level of discrepancy between the various different primers that we're using. So yes, I do think that there is sequence validation that there is an ISA-like virus here. How it gets classified I think will be determined both based on a fuller sequence and also obviously we have not established that it causes disease. Cohen Transcript, Dec 15, 2011; page 60.
Dr. Nylund's response to whether ISAv is here or not:
Dr. NYLUND: But if you look at the situation in wild Pacific salmon that we've seen so far and the result presented by Miller here, I don't think we have seen evidence of ISA virus in Pacific salmon, so far. No hard evidence. We have a lot of indications that the virus could be present in Pacific salmon, but there is no hard evidence. And I really would like to discuss the results presented by Miller, because I find them a bit strange, some of the results. So I hope that maybe she could clarify something for me, because it's something I'm wondering about, if I'm allowed to ask her about how the results were obtained? Cohen Transcript, Dec 15, 2011; page 57.
Dr. Nylund's follow-up response to Miller's results:
DR. NYLUND: Yeah, well, if you look at that presentation by Miller, she has an alignment of the ISA-7 showing three fixed differences. Actually, if you look at that alignment, and I meant alignment because I have a lot of sequences in my lab that hasn't been published yet, there are seven differences in the space between the two primers and those seven differences cannot be found in Canadian or European ISA virus. But unfortunately, those differences also introduces a stop codon into this sequence, which means that it's not a functional sequence, it can't be coding for an ISA virus or another virus protein because you don't have stop codons in there. A stop codon means that it's the end of the sequence, coding sequence and this is not the end of the coding sequence for an ISA virus.
So that means that I find it hard to believe that this could be a functional sequence. I think this could be due to unspecific annealing of the primers that are picking up something else than actually virus. Cohen Transcript, Dec 15, 2011; page 100.
As described in the previous chapter, I find that the evidence does not allow me to conclude whether the infectious salmon anemia virus (ISAv) or an ISAv-like virus currently exists in Fraser River sockeye. I also do not have sufficient evidence to determine
whether such an ISAv or ISAv-like virus, if present, is endemic to BC waters or has been introduced. (Justice Bruce Cohen; Cohen Final Report; Vol. 2; Ch. 5; pg. 111)
To read more of the Dec 15, 2011 testimony (including Dr. Kibenge's response to whether ISAv is here or not on page 59):
http://www.watershed-watch.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2011/12/CohenCommission-HearingTranscript-2011-12-15.pdf
-
Moosebreath, you might want to look for a new source of information. Better yet, read the actual Cohen Final Report and related transcripts with exhibits for yourself. Somehow Dr. Miller does not seem to agree with your source – neither does the data collected to date. Here is some more information on Creative farmed Chinook.
DR. MILLER: And so I don't think that there's -- and there's no indication that what we're picking up as ISAV positives has any correlation with their jaundiced syndrome. There's no indication that it's causing disease, necessarily, in those fish, but we basically picked up a similar prevalence level and CT values that we see in wild migrating sockeye. Cohen Transcript Dec 15, 2011 page 53
MS. CALLAN:
26 Q: Now, your results were interesting because you didn't only have unhealthy fish testing positive for ISAV?
DR. MILLER: Yes, and I never suggested that ISAV was anything to do with this jaundice disease.
Q: Okay. And in fact, if we turn to provincial Tab 22, you'd agree that the positive ISAV PCR test results are as common in healthy fish as they are in sick fish?
DR. MILLER: Yes, I only saw this morning, but yes, again, I never came forward and suggested there was any relationship. Cohen Transcript Dec 15, 2011 page 96
-
Moosebreath, you might want to look for a new source of information. Better yet, read the actual Cohen Final Report and related transcripts with exhibits for yourself. Somehow Dr. Miller does not seem to agree with your source – neither does the data collected to date. Here is some more information on Creative farmed Chinook.
DR. MILLER: And so I don't think that there's -- and there's no indication that what we're picking up as ISAV positives has any correlation with their jaundiced syndrome. There's no indication that it's causing disease, necessarily, in those fish, but we basically picked up a similar prevalence level and CT values that we see in wild migrating sockeye. Cohen Transcript Dec 15, 2011 page 53
MS. CALLAN:
26 Q: Now, your results were interesting because you didn't only have unhealthy fish testing positive for ISAV?
DR. MILLER: Yes, and I never suggested that ISAV was anything to do with this jaundice disease.
Q: Okay. And in fact, if we turn to provincial Tab 22, you'd agree that the positive ISAV PCR test results are as common in healthy fish as they are in sick fish?
DR. MILLER: Yes, I only saw this morning, but yes, again, I never came forward and suggested there was any relationship. Cohen Transcript Dec 15, 2011 page 96
OK but......http://www.vancouversun.com/news/todays-paper/Secrecy+denial+coverup+norm+Ottawa/9287112/story.html
-
And even more http://www.vancouversun.com/entertainment/books/Harper+government+getting+inconvenient+facts+author/9283951/story.html
-
Ok but....Ms Morton and her followers continuously misrepresent how virus testing works and keep misrepresenting what other scientists actually said. The farmed Chinook Salmon from Creative is a perfect example of this. Fish farm critics can say whatever they want, but the facts are the facts here: There is no evidence that what Dr. Miller found (in the ISA segment 7 test) is the cause of jaundice in farmed Chinook Salmon at Creative. Dr. Miller even goes on record as saying there is no indication what she found has any correlation with jaundice syndrome. If there is hard evidence that proves otherwise then let's see it. The fact is that if you look through the Cohen Final Report, transcript and exhibits you won't find what supports the opinion that Creative farmed Chinook are dying from whatever Dr. Miller found.
Somehow farm critics who seem to rally behind whatever Dr. Miller says and does continuously misrepresent her work. As I said before, farm critics cannot wave the flag of trying to protect science while at the same time doing their part to suppress and misrepresent the findings of science that may not subscribe to their views. So, although I see your point about our current leadership back east, what further purpose does it serve to continuously make false claims which mislead the public? Are your interests served well by being told false claims about Creative farmed Chinook.....or would you rather know the facts of the matter, even if they do not subscribe to your views of the industry, especially from the individuals directly involved who are apparently your go-to scientists (i.e. Dr. Miller)?
-
Ten words or less shteve. Please.
-
Ten words or less shteve. Please.
I'll try to help him out.
(http://i158.photobucket.com/albums/t82/Willy1956/long-winded_zps14188661.jpg) (http://s158.photobucket.com/user/Willy1956/media/long-winded_zps14188661.jpg.html)
-
Steve made the right points, something that couldn't be done in ten words but you two are too entrenched and don't want to listen ... nothing new there though ;D
-
Five words or less Dave. :)
-
Steve made the right points, something that couldn't be done in ten words but you two are too entrenched and don't want to listen ... nothing new there though ;D
Listening is one thing. Believing? Well there ya go.
-
Listening is one thing. Believing? Well there ya go.
I am not sure you actually listen or read what anyone says. Here let me assist you this time:
(http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-YofEd4f_qEE/Tae8SDubk_I/AAAAAAAAAEI/9nLmStj7m4I/s1600/ReadingForDummies.jpg)
-
Ten words or less shteve. Please.
Avoidance and more deflection. Thanks.
-
Avoidance and more deflection. Thanks.
Whatever.........but congrats on the less than ten word guideline. 8)
-
Whatever.........but congrats on the less than ten word guideline. 8)
Congrats on being very predictable in your response. :P
-
http://www.faithit.com/brilliant-comedian-on-certainty-truth/
-
Ok but....Ms Morton and her followers continuously misrepresent how virus testing works and keep misrepresenting what other scientists actually said. The farmed Chinook Salmon from Creative is a perfect example of this. Fish farm critics can say whatever they want, but the facts are the facts here: There is no evidence that what Dr. Miller found (in the ISA segment 7 test) is the cause of jaundice in farmed Chinook Salmon at Creative. Dr. Miller even goes on record as saying there is no indication what she found has any correlation with jaundice syndrome. If there is hard evidence that proves otherwise then let's see it. The fact is that if you look through the Cohen Final Report, transcript and exhibits you won't find what supports the opinion that Creative farmed Chinook are dying from whatever Dr. Miller found.
Somehow farm critics who seem to rally behind whatever Dr. Miller says and does continuously misrepresent her work. As I said before, farm critics cannot wave the flag of trying to protect science while at the same time doing their part to suppress and misrepresent the findings of science that may not subscribe to their views. So, although I see your point about our current leadership back east, what further purpose does it serve to continuously make false claims which mislead the public? Are your interests served well by being told false claims about Creative farmed Chinook.....or would you rather know the facts of the matter, even if they do not subscribe to your views of the industry, especially from the individuals directly involved who are apparently your go-to scientists (i.e. Dr. Miller)?
Not sure who you are grouping in your 'followers'. I think alot of people do use info from many sources,and use it to make their point.That is their right to free speech.
I read alot of the info re testing,etc,and it seems that Dr. Miller has nothing to lose in stating her facts as qualified researcher.In fact she was 1 of the scientists on staff by dfo that I think dfo muzzled when they didnt like her results.
Creative salmon is ,I think a more sustainable way to produce salmon,and regardless of who approved the organic license,dont you think it makes them more accountable for environmental standards.Is that what everyone wants?
As for the jaundice,I think thats a red herring,this past year while I was fishing the Vedder,witnessed this in a pink salmon,He swam in front of me ,beat himself to death on the rocks.Didnt think about it at the at first.When I looked at him later ,very noticeable that he was yellow all over,even his flesh.Not being a scientist,could this have been jaundice in a pink salmon.Not to be alarmist but just raising the possibility that it can happen in all species.
-
Not sure who you are grouping in your 'followers'. I think alot of people do use info from many sources,and use it to make their point.That is their right to free speech.
I read alot of the info re testing,etc,and it seems that Dr. Miller has nothing to lose in stating her facts as qualified researcher.In fact she was 1 of the scientists on staff by dfo that I think dfo muzzled when they didnt like her results.
Creative salmon is ,I think a more sustainable way to produce salmon,and regardless of who approved the organic license,dont you think it makes them more accountable for environmental standards.Is that what everyone wants?
As for the jaundice,I think thats a red herring,this past year while I was fishing the Vedder,witnessed this in a pink salmon,He swam in front of me ,beat himself to death on the rocks.Didnt think about it at the at first.When I looked at him later ,very noticeable that he was yellow all over,even his flesh.Not being a scientist,could this have been jaundice in a pink salmon.Not to be alarmist but just raising the possibility that it can happen in all species.
Is anyone here being denied their right to free speech? Is anyone here being denied using information from other sources? In my opinion, those that are too uncomfortable with the responses they will receive after posting information expressing their opinion (or from others) on forums like this may want to reconsider it. I don’t have a problem at all with people using information from other sources to make their point. You are totally right about free speech (within limits of legality and the rules of this forum); however, it is my right (along with others) to respond to it if it is posted here. Would you not agree?
As for Dr. Miller, I purposely posted her testimony in contrast to what was posted to show how some information out there on this topic is repeatedly masqueraded as facts. She (as well as the other experts) is stating the facts of what she found and what she did not – it is in the Cohen Final Report and related material. The problem is that some individuals refuse to acknowledge what Dr. Miller says when it does not agree with their opinion. Salmonconfidential is great example of how much of what Dr. Miller said was edited out because it did not fit the conspiracy plot. In my opinion that is a form of muzzling also. As for “muzzling by dfo” that is not true because it was actually the Privy Council that was responsible – not the department.
http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/dfo-scientist-says-privy-council-silenced-her-1.987107
http://www.pco-bcp.gc.ca/index.asp?lang=eng
I agree with you that this jaundice is a bit of a red herring; however, I am all for future testing to see what the cause of this is if it is indeed a problem. It is important to note that lack of evidence does not mean stop looking – it means that what has been obtained so far is insufficient to make any definite conclusions. Saying that 25% of the farmed Chinook at Creative farms tested positive for ISAv (or ISAv-like) and implying that it is why salmon are turning up dead because of jaundice disease is quite a stretch supported by no hard data. It has already been shown that fish that have jaundice do not have ISAv (Smith et al 2006; already presented previously). It is also difficult to make that leap when the prevalence of what Dr. Miller found is similar in healthy fish as it is in sick fish – not to mention we are not even sure what Dr. Miller found actually causes disease or mortality in the first place.
-
Old news I know but had not seen it before.
http://www.livingoceans.org/media/releases/isa-virus-confirmed-aquabounty-s-genetically-engineered-salmon?language=en
-
Old news I know but had not seen it before.
http://www.livingoceans.org/media/releases/isa-virus-confirmed-aquabounty-s-genetically-engineered-salmon?language=en
Try to keep up Chris :)