Print

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

[StillAqua]

This could be a long winter for all involved    :


BC salmon test negative for deadly virus, CFIA reports Randy Shore, Vancouver Sun : Tuesday, November 08, 2011 6:06 PM



New testing by Canada's Department of Fisheries and Oceans has found no sign of the ISA virus in B.C. wild salmon.

SFU researcher Rick Routledge and salmon farming opponent Alexandra Morton reported last month that samples taken from B.C. sockeye salmon in Rivers Inlet had tested positive for the ISA virus, which is known to be lethal to Atlantic salmon of the kind widely farmed in B.C.

The CFIA reported today that additional testing has not confirmed the results released by Morton and Routledge.

The virus is not known to be harmful to Pacific wild salmon, but it could have devastated the salmon farming industry.

The BC Salmon Farmers Association response to the news follows:

News that no Infectious Salmon Anemia (ISA) was detected in follow up testing of Pacific salmon samples by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency is welcome information for B.C.'s salmon farmers.

Following up on unconfirmed results publicized widely by anti-salmon farm campaigners four weeks ago, the CFIA tested the same sample collection plus additional samples collected and had no positive results for ISA.

"This is a significant result for everyone involved: researchers, regulators, wild salmon advocates, salmon farmers and our coastal communities," said Mary Ellen Walling, Executive Director. "After seeing the original news distributed in such an inflammatory way, we hope this update will allay those concerns."

On Oct. 17, Simon Fraser University hosted a press conference claiming that positive results had been found in two of 48 smolt samples tested for ISAv. This was contrary to every other previous test for ISA in B.C. with nearly 5,000 fish analyzed since 2003. They all showed negative for the virus.

In the follow up testing done by CFIA, all of those 48 smolts tested negative as did other samples collected by CFIA from researchers involved. Some samples were too degraded for testing to be completed.

The allegation that ISA had been found in B.C. was concerning to B.C. salmon farmers who, while confident that the extensive testing showed ISA is not on their farms, were worried about the possible effect of the virus which is harmful to Atlantic salmon. Pacific salmon are relatively immune to ISAv.

"This is a good example of why proper sampling, testing and reporting procedures are in place and should be followed: the unconfirmed report from Simon Fraser appeared to be designed to create as much hype as possible. This has cost significant resources in time and money in emergency follow-up while also potentially impacting international markets for our business," said Walling.

"We're pleased to see the thorough way CFIA is following up, but are dismayed at the way campaigners used this to create fear about our operations," said Walling.

The BCSFA understands that the investigation by the CFIA is continuing. The industry is providing any additional information to the CFIA as needed. In the meantime, our farmers continue in their regular, ongoing sampling/monitoring program.

The BCSFA represents salmon farm companies and those who supply services and supplies to the industry. Salmon-farming provides for 6,000 direct and indirect jobs while contributing $800-million to the provincial economy each year.

© Shaw Media Inc., 2011. All rights reserved.


Read it on Global News: Global BC | BC salmon test negative for deadly virus, CFIA reports

[alwaysfishn]

Good stuff Dan   So let's see here ... pink salmon extinction, the decimation of Fraser sockeye, sea lice infestations, over use of antibiotics, killing the ocean floor, the yellow pink thingy (absolutely the worst mistake she made for any credibility, imo), this latest "pestilence" scare, etc, all kinda panned out.

Want to say more but no, not yet.

   ... and salmon farms are absolute dead zones within one kilometer.  WRONG!!!!
...  farmed salmon contain lethal levels of PCB's and are unfit for consumption.   WRONG !!!!!
..  Farmed Atlantic s will out compete  wild salmon in the rivers to reproduce and reproduce successfully.  WRONG AGAIN!!!!!!
... The yellow fish thing.....   EMBARRASSING!!!

You guys are sounding like what you suggest Morton sounds like.

However because we know that she isn't benefiting from the fish farm industry, I'm inclined to accept her words over yours....

[aquapaloosa]

   ... and salmon farms are absolute dead zones within one kilometer.  WRONG!!!!
...  farmed salmon contain lethal levels of PCB's and are unfit for consumption.   WRONG !!!!!
..  Farmed Atlantic s will out compete  wild salmon in the rivers to reproduce and reproduce successfully.  WRONG AGAIN!!!!!!
... The yellow fish thing.....   EMBARRASSING!!!

AF,

The above list is a portion of the claims made by morton in the past that have been proven to be totally false. Its just strange that you would hold on to any of these old ideas as fact.

[holmes]

Likewise I would like to see any actual proof of negative impact caused by the farms.
I have yet to see any conclusive evidence that they are actually harming anything.

Salmon runs collapsing?
-Last 2 years shows that it's most likely ocean conditions after these 2 banner years.

Sludge under farms with nothing there?
-Not sure what I would expect to find in an aphotic zone of the ocean. Not much of the ocean floor is inhabited.

Eating same food as wild stocks?
-What about the MILLIONS of pinks the Chinese, etc release into the ocean for "salmon ranching" (much like enhancement hatcheries, except larger numbers and all are harvested when they come back) that we never hear about, which are actually competing with wild salmon for food. Farms have a strict limit of food fish they are allotted to catch every year. This is monitored very carefully. In fact, salmon farming has the most strict set of rules out of any farming/food producing operation.

Polluting the ocean?
-Almost laughable. Way worse is the massive ball of trash floating around out there. Why does no one focus on that? Why focus on something that is producing organic waste?

One could argue the positive benefit is that they are taking pressure off wild stocks in the form of over fishing (to produce enough fish for a growing population).
Financial contribution is also there, although I believe the financial contribution of wild salmon is far greater.

By the way here is something my teacher sent me today:
http://blogs.vancouversun.com/2011/11/08/bc-wild-salmon-test-negative-for-deadly-virus-cfia-reports/

Hmmmm......

Cheers,
Dan

one could try and argue that every day , but what about the pressure being put on the wild stocks with regards to competing for food because in order to produce food for the lice farms, the food has to come from someplace, so where do ya think that is?, you bet, rite out of the environment that the wild salmon live in, pretty much rite out of their mouths...... .....holmes*

[holmes]

and for someone to say that there is no negetive environMENTAL impact to the environment is totally out to lunch to put it politely, you gotta be f*&%ing kidding me....holmes*

[aquapaloosa]

the food has to come from someplace, so where do ya think that is?, you bet, rite out of the environment that the wild salmon live in, pretty much rite out of their mouths.....

I guess this would be true if bc salmon went to the south pacific and the Atlantic to feed.  
Like your avatar your pissin in the wind on that one.

[alwaysfishn]

AF,

The above list is a portion of the claims made by morton in the past that have been proven to be totally false. Its just strange that you would hold on to any of these old ideas as fact.

I find it's strange than you and the fish farms are claiming that fish farms aren't damaging wild fish or the environment. Why would I believe you over Morton? Most of us determine the credibility of a source based on who signs their pay cheques....

I know that Morton makes very little money from what she does. Her motivation is a desire to save the Pacific wild salmon.

How much money does the industry stand to lose if Morton's claims are correct?

[aquapaloosa]

Her motivation is a desire

Perhaps, but you should know that morton, while playing the pour card is likely, very, VERY wealthy.

[holmes]

I guess this would be true if bc salmon went to the south pacific and the Atlantic to feed.  
Like your avatar your pissin in the wind on that one.

sure thing chief... ...holmes*

[chris gadsden]

Likewise I would like to see any actual proof of negative impact caused by the farms.
I have yet to see any conclusive evidence that they are actually harming anything.



Cheers,
Dan

Look what has happened in other countries Dan, can you give me an answer why it will be different here, no one here has given me an answer yet, maybe it is because they do not have one.

[chris gadsden]

Good stuff Dan   So let's see here ... pink salmon extinction, the decimation of Fraser sockeye, sea lice infestations, over use of antibiotics, killing the ocean floor, the yellow pink thingy (absolutely the worst mistake she made for any credibility, imo), this latest "pestilence" scare, etc, all kinda panned out.

Want to say more but no, not yet.

Before you do read this.

http://salmonwarriors.blogspot.com/2011/11/salmongate.html

[alwaysfishn]

Perhaps, but you should know that morton, while playing the pour card is likely, very, VERY wealthy.

That's pulling at straws....    

[shuswapsteve]

Look what has happened in other countries Dan, can you give me an answer why it will be different here, no one here has given me an answer yet, maybe it is because they do not have one.

Have you been following the inquiry, Chris?  Or have you just been following Morton's blog?  If you have taken the time to read ALL of the testimony and see ALL of the exhibits from the aquaculture portion on the inquiry it would have spelled it out for you.  Today is just another example of sloppy science from your "superior scientist".  Time to be objective about this instead of just rehashing more Morton dribble.

Holmes, your line of questioning is so pre-school.  The environment would benefit much better if we did absolutely nothing to it.  Big mystery!  You are so friking brilliant!  But guess what?  All that produce you eat and all that cattle meat you consume likely came from land that was altered to accommodate food production.  That's right...fish habitat and wildlife habitat altered to produce what you eat on a daily basis.  What do you think was underneath all those parking lots in Burnaby and Coquitlam at one time.  Where is your protesting spirt now?  Go take another sip of Morton Kool-Aid.

Why would I believe you over Morton? Most of us determine the credibility of a source based on who signs their pay cheques....

That is a lame excuse commonly used by critics that is so old now.  You should understand that many of the people who take the opposite view do not work for fish farms.

[chris gadsden]

Have you been following the inquiry, Chris?  Or have you just been following Morton's blog?  If you have taken the time to read ALL of the testimony and see ALL of the exhibits from the aquaculture portion on the inquiry it would have spelled it out for you.  Today is just another example of sloppy science from your "superior scientist".  Time to be objective about this instead of just rehashing more Morton dribble.

Holmes, your line of questioning is so pre-school.  The environment would benefit much better if we did absolutely nothing to it.  Big mystery!  You are so friking brilliant!  But guess what?  All that produce you eat and all that cattle meat you consume likely came from land that was altered to accommodate food production.  That's right...fish habitat and wildlife habitat altered to produce what you eat on a daily basis.  What do you think was underneath all those parking lots in Burnaby and Coquitlam at one time.  Where is your protesting spirt now?  Go take another sip of Morton Kool-Aid.
That is a lame excuse commonly used by critics that is so old now.  You should understand that many of the people who take the opposite view do not work for fish farms.

You too have not answered my questions above.

[alwaysfishn]

You should understand that many of the people who take the opposite view do not work for fish farms.

That's exactly my point! Most of the people supporting the fish farms work for them or for DFO, whose responsibility is to promote fish farms. There is even someone on this forum who has reversed his position of opposing fish farms, perhaps in anticipation of landing an aquaculture related job when he completes his education.

Can you see the pattern here?  I appreciate everyone is entitled to a paycheque, but no one is naive enough to not know that the organization that hands out the paycheque has a significant influence on what they say.....