Print

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

[alwaysfishn]

With the recent IHN outbreaks in BC feedlots, the industry has been quick to get the message out that IHN is only lethal to Atlantics, not wild salmon. But is this fact or just another line of fiction from an industry determined to grow it's product in our oceans no matter the cost.

Science has determined that wild salmon has developed immunity to the virus however it is a carrier of the virus. Feedlots take this bit of science and blame the wild salmon for the outbreaks in their feedlots. They try to portray that feedlots are the victims rather than the perpetrators of this disease.

A topic that we don't hear a lot about is how the IHN virus is lethal to salmon fry in fresh water. "The IHN virus is well recognized as a lethal pathogen to fry sockeye salmon in freshwater." http://www.cohencommission.ca/en/pdf/TR/Project1-ExecutiveSummary.pdf

Here's the problem.....  The feedlots that are currently being culled as a result of an IHN outbreak have been spewing IHN viruses at a rate of millions of virus per second, as they replicate very quickly. The feedlots want you to believe that they are pro-active when an outbreak occurs by disinfecting their equipment and "isolating" the pens...  Apparently they are unaware that the virus is generated in the water and is impossible to contain!

While this is going on, millions of salmon are swimming past these IHN cesspools. Naturally the wild salmon are being infected and while they may not die from the virus, they become carriers. Swimming up the fresh water streams they in turn infect other wild salmon. Unlike sea lice which dies within days of being in contact with fresh water, IHN can survive for up to 7 weeks. "The IHN virus has been demonstrated to survive in fresh water at 10 "C for 7 wk (Wedemeyer et al. 1978). " http://www.int-res.com/articles/dao/16/d016p111.pdf

While most salmon fry have left their fresh water streams and are in the ocean, last years sockeye fry are still swimming in a fresh water lake downstream of the river they were born in. As the returning salmon mingle with the sockeye fry they are transferring the virus to the fry ensuring certain death for the fry before they even reach the ocean.

Is this another dirty little secret that the feedlots and government haven't revealed and is the cause of our low sockeye returns??  Has a study been done correlating the IHN infections in the feedlots, to the demise of our sockeye runs? Why not?

[absolon]

The industry has pointed out that the disease was transferred to farms from the wild fish swimming by the pens. Those infected wild fish are already delivering the virus to fresh water without any assistance from farm fish.

[aquapaloosa]

Sorry for the double post but this is an ideal location for the article.

http://salmonfarmscience.com/2012/08/03/viruses-from-salmon-farms-are-low-risk-to-wild-fish/

[alwaysfishn]

Sorry for the double post but this is an ideal location for the article.

http://salmonfarmscience.com/2012/08/03/viruses-from-salmon-farms-are-low-risk-to-wild-fish/

Like your pro-feedlot buddy, you are trying to refocus the blame on the wild fish.

While wild fish are carriers they do not live in the close confines of a feedlot so the IHN virus is not as easily transferred between wild fish as it is in the feedlot fish. Take the example of a kid with a cold...... sneezing and infecting some of his class mates. Imagine a class room packed with kids who all have a cold..... and are sneezing......  The chances of a passerby being infected, go up substantially.

The recently announced infected feedlots, have been spewing 100's of millions of the IHN viruses, infecting every wild fish swimming by. Even after the infected feedlot is "isolated", the viruses it has been spewing, continue to live and infect wild salmon for up to 3 weeks in the salt water. This in the midst of 100's of 1,000's of migrating salmon.

Not a problem for the wild fish as absolon suggests.....   however once these infected wild salmon reach a fresh water lake and mingle with the sockeye smolts still living there, they become killing machines. Add to that the fact the virus lives for up to 7 weeks in fresh water, they can potentially kill an entire years worth of sockeye.

Is this really the fault of the wild fish?  

[Bassonator]

Like your pro-feedlot buddy, you are trying to refocus the blame on the wild fish.

While wild fish are carriers they do not live in the close confines of a feedlot so the IHN virus is not as easily transferred between wild fish as it is in the feedlot fish. Take the example of a kid with a cold...... sneezing and infecting some of his class mates. Imagine a class room packed with kids who all have a cold..... and are sneezing......  The chances of a passerby being infected, go up substantially.

The recently announced infected feedlots, have been spewing 100's of millions of the IHN viruses, infecting every wild fish swimming by. Even after the infected feedlot is "isolated", the viruses it has been spewing, continue to live and infect wild salmon for up to 3 weeks in the salt water. This in the midst of 100's of 1,000's of migrating salmon.

Not a problem for the wild fish as absolon suggests.....   however once these infected wild salmon reach a fresh water lake and mingle with the sockeye smolts still living there, they become killing machines. Add to that the fact the virus lives for up to 7 weeks in fresh water, they can potentially kill an entire years worth of sockeye.

Is this really the fault of the wild fish?  

yup

[Bassonator]

How long did it take you to come up with this cock and bull theory.

[aquapaloosa]

While wild fish are carriers they do not live in the close confines of a feedlot so the IHN virus is not as easily transferred between wild fish as it is in the feedlot fish. Take the example of a kid with a cold...... sneezing and infecting some of his class mates. Imagine a class room packed with kids who all have a cold..... and are sneezing......  The chances of a passerby being infected, go up substantially.

Not if they have already had it and have been exposed to it for generations for thousands of years and have built up an immunity unlike the kids in the classroom who have never been exposed to it ever.

AGAIN, YOU AF are the only one using the phrase "BLAME in on the wild fish".  Thats just sounds like another one of your catch phrases.  If it did not come from the wild fish then where did it come from???
It is what it is bud.  If the atlanics had it all along they would have died in their hatchery.  They would have never made it to salt water.  Unless I am wrong.  If it did not come from the wild, naturally, then where did it come from?  Just wondering because you seem to have it all figured out.

And you fail to recognize the quick removal of these fish from the ocean.  I might add that these removals are happening 100 even 1000 times faster than when the last round of IHN had went around.  They are happening before the population even starts to die of in significant numbers and in a matter of days.  Pretty impressive I say.  Remember I have been doing this a long time.

When was that other IHN out break 2004-2006? 

[alwaysfishn]

And you fail to recognize the quick removal of these fish from the ocean.  I might add that these removals are happening 100 even 1000 times faster than when the last round of IHN had went around.  They are happening before the population even starts to die of in significant numbers and in a matter of days. 

Are you serious??

From the article you posted: "IHN is an RNA virus, which replicate themselves very quickly. In fact, RNA viruses replicate so quickly that a single infectious particle can reproduce itself three times a second!"

I'm supposed to believe that the feedlots are fast at cleaning up their mess    Give me a break!  They may be 1000 times faster than last outbreak, but at 3 replications a second the viruses have spewed out trillions of new viruses before CFIA even gets around to ordering a cull!

[aquapaloosa]

I'm supposed to believe that the feedlots are fast at cleaning up their mess  Huh  Give me a break!  They may be 1000 times faster than last outbreak, but at 3 replications a second the viruses have spewed out trillions of new viruses before CFIA even gets around to ordering a cull!

 

My point is the last time all this went down it was really bad and wasn't managed like it is being managed now.   If this situation is as bad as you perceive now than there should be no salmon anywhere from the last out break right? Why do we still see salmon in the Fraser.  Heck 30 million made it back after the last out break of IHN.  Can u explain that to me. how can it be.  The damage should be evident.  I suspect you will point out the 2009 sock run to accompany your view but the fact is that:  Salmon runs fluctuate dramatically.  We have to learn why.

When was the last out break? 2004? 2006?  I am not sure. 

Your a banker.  One virus is not like one dollar.  Its not even like a penny.  How can I help you relate to this??? One minute "we" are a bunch of lying misleading spinning propagandists,  the next you are holding "our" word up high as it is the all time truth.  Find a happy medium bud so that you do not come across the way you do.

Handpicked seines Hand picked data.

[aquapaloosa]

From the article you posted: "IHN is an RNA virus, which replicate themselves very quickly. In fact, RNA viruses replicate so quickly that a single infectious particle can reproduce itself three times a second!"

Your just buzz wording again.  If you, or I for that matter, were virologists perhaps we could really grasp what the above really means with all the other factors included.  I actually do not understand it because I am not a biologist and honestly when I read it to me it reads a bit scary too but I certainly am not going to jump to conclusions about it.  Especially with all the other information I have already attained.  Stay calm AF.  Maybe there is something for both of us to learn here.  Although I am certain your mind is already made up and you are so far beyond trying to learn anything.  If I am wrong do tell.

[shuswapsteve]

Is this the best you can do, AF?  For one thing, the industry or government never said that IHN is not lethal to wild salmon.  To recap once again, IHN has been shown to be more lethal to wild salmonids, particularly Sockeye, when they are in the alevin or fry stage.  However, adult wild salmon have been shown to be much more resistant – able to carry the virus without developing the disease.  They are seen as carriers of the virus.  Secondly, IHN has been present in wild salmon for a long, long, long time.....long before fish farms were ever put on the coast of BC.  As aquapaloosa states correctly, wild salmon have been exposed to the virus for generations.....likely many centuries and have built up immunity.  When Atlantics are put into salt water by the farms they do not carry the virus because they would be dead if they did.  The reason is that Atlantic Salmon have not built up the immunity that wild salmon have done over a long period of time.

You are correct when you say that adult wild salmon can carry this virus during migration to natal habitats in freshwater, but then you seem to imply that adult wild salmon are getting infected with IHN from fish farms while neglecting to consider the fact that adult wild salmon have this virus already (see first paragraph).  You also need to remember that IHN does not last forever in the water without a host.  Viral particles die rapidly in sunlight.  If you strongly feel that fish farms are storing and amplifying IHN, an already naturally occurring virus in Pacific Salmonids, and negatively impacting wild salmon then please provide some information to back up this claim.

Farms are very proactive in testing their fish for viruses and diseases like IHN because it is very lethal.  More importantly, IHN is a federally reportable disease, so there are some pretty strict guidelines that have to be followed.  Farms act quickly to remove the fish and have strict protocols to follow which you do not seem to mention much of or understand even though it has been explained to you.  Aquapaloosa does this for a living, AF.  If you believe he is not forthcoming or incorrect then please provide some actual information to back up your claims.  At the moment, I am more inclined to believe someone that actually does the job than someone that keeps repeating more unsubstantiated rhetoric.

I find it very funny when you say “here’s the problem”….because the “problem” is and continues to be that you are not reading and understanding the facts about IHN.  Here is a brief sample of the material you should have been looking at……which is easily obtainable on the internet.

http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/aquatic-animals/diseases/reportable/ihn/fact-sheet/eng/1330124360826/1330124556262
http://www.int-res.com/articles/dao/6/d006p221.pdf
http://msc.khamiahosting.com/sites/default/files/2012-05-29%20IHN%20fact%20sheet%202%20FINAL.pdf
http://pubs.usgs.gov/fs/2012/3027/
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/rd2007/rdsalmon-saumon_35-eng.htm
http://www.int-res.com/articles/dao2006/72/d072p213.pdf
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/fish/diseases/docs/ihnv_fact_sheet.pdf
http://msc.khamiahosting.com/sites/default/files/2012-05-23%20IHN%20virus%20facts%20FINAL.pdf
http://www.salmonfarmers.org/sites/default/files/ihn_corrections.pdf

[alwaysfishn]

By applying only a little logic, it's easy to conclude that the IHN infected feedlots are amplifying the transmission of the disease. This results in increased numbers of infected wild fish transmitting the disease to salmonoids in fresh water which is lethal to them.

Suggesting that the farms are able to cleanup an infected pen quickly, thereby minimizing the amplification of the virus effect is illogical. That's the equivalent of closing the barn door after all the livestock has escaped. The only solution is to get the pens out of the ocean.

[shuswapsteve]

By applying only a little logic, it's easy to conclude that the IHN infected feedlots are amplifying the transmission of the disease. This results in increased numbers of infected wild fish transmitting the disease to salmonoids in fresh water which is lethal to them.

Suggesting that the farms are able to cleanup an infected pen quickly, thereby minimizing the amplification of the virus effect is illogical. That's the equivalent of closing the barn door after all the livestock has escaped. The only solution is to get the pens out of the ocean.

I have no doubt it is easy for you....Speculation is a relatively easy exercise.  How about applying a little evidence and fact?

Thanks for keeping me entertained. 

[alwaysfishn]

I have no doubt it is easy for you....Speculation is a relatively easy exercise.  How about applying a little evidence and fact?

Thanks for keeping me entertained. 

Evidence and fact goes both ways.....   While taking your word that the feedlots are not amplifying the diseases is something you continue to ask us to do, a little science proving that, would be considerably more assuring....

As far as entertainment, I don't find anything entertaining about how you as spokesman for the feedlots, continue to minimize not only the risk, but the scourge the feedlots are inflicting on the wild salmon.

[alwaysfishn]

From CFIA's website: http://www.inspection.gc.ca/animals/aquatic-animals/diseases/reportable/ihn/fact-sheet/eng/1330124360826/1330124556262

Species susceptible to infectious haematopoietic necrosis that exist in the natural environment in Canada include:

    Acipenser transmontanus (white sturgeon)
    Aulorhynchus flavidus (tube snout)
    Clupea pallasii (Pacific herring)
    Cymatogaster aggregata (shiner perch)
    Esox lucius (northern pike)
    Gadus morhua* (Atlantic cod*)
    Lota lota* (burbot*)
    Oncorhynchus clarkii (cutthroat trout)
    Oncorhynchus gorbuscha (pink salmon)
    Oncorhynchus keta (chum salmon)
    Oncorhynchus kisutch (coho salmon)
    Oncorhynchus mykiss (rainbow trout)
    Oncorhynchus nerka (sockeye salmon)
    Oncorhynchus tshawytscha (chinook salmon)
    Salmo salar (Atlantic salmon)
    Salmo trutta (brown trout)
    Salvelinus alpinus (arctic char)
    Salvelinus fontinalis (brook trout)
    Salvelinus namaycush (lake trout)
    Thymallus arcticus* (arctic grayling*)


"Infectious haematopoietic necrosis is a cause of death in:
    young finfish raised in freshwater hatcheries
    young juveniles recently introduced into seawater (death rates reach 100 percent over a short period of time)
    older finfish raised in seawater (death rates range from 20 percent to 100 percent over an extended period of time)"

Still believe that IHN is not lethal to wild fish?  How many young salmonoids have died through contact with the recent virus outbreaks in the feedlots?