Print

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

[shuswapsteve]

Poor ethics , responsible companies dont just  do whatever they want, they do what is right for there industry and environment .
 Nobody wants these companies doing this here,you cant blame the countries government.In a lot of causes the countries have poorly organized government regulatory bodies,this does happen in other industries as well.
 Companies should not take advantage,they should know better and be ethical in there practices.

And companies here don't do whatever they want. They do want is right for their industry and the environment. They are in competition with other countries.

Who makes the rules in this circumstance - government or industry?  The industry here is probably the most regulated in the world in regards to finish aquaculture. So your worries shouldn't be much.

[shuswapsteve]

"This is the first time the virus had been detected in farmed fish in the area in more than nine years. The last time, it led to a two-year-long outbreak in which 36 farms were infected. More than 12 million salmon either died or had to be culled."
 

Well well well another news agency making up stories about fish farms. Steve likely going to come back with a long winded reply that's impossible to follow. Keeping his fingers busy defending the poor practices of shoddy foreign companies. Your all over the place with the farm thing though Steve just ask Dave.

"Thirdly, the regulatory environment is much different than Chile." I believe you meant they were morally obliged to open a fish farm in a lax environment.

No this really happened but this is old news and was rehashed many times already. But similar to before anti fish farm critics don't understand IHN or its pathology as it relates to Pacific Salmon and Atlantic Salmon so it's kind of pointless to pursue further. Maybe try learning about IHN more and then we could have a meaningful discussion. I agree with Dave - critics are pretty much dead in the water with their rhetoric and are trying to fire off their last remaining shells as their ship sinks into the abyss.

[salmonrook]

No this really happened but this is old news and was rehashed many times already. But similar to before anti fish farm critics don't understand IHN or its pathology as it relates to Pacific Salmon and Atlantic Salmon so it's kind of pointless to pursue further. Maybe try learning about IHN more and then we could have a meaningful discussion. I agree with Dave - critics are pretty much dead in the water with their rhetoric and are trying to fire off their last remaining shells as their ship sinks into the abyss.

I dont look at this as a win or loss issue, I look at as keeping these issues and regulations in the public realm,in the media, to keep pressure on government and industry .
 This way we make sure that things are done correctly ,prefer to not stick my head in the sand and  trust  the  large multinational companies to self regulate.To me this would be defeat.
 I do understand the IHN virus and status in bc , native salmon resistance to it.
 Not sure why people advocate for fish farms, I assume they are in the business.
 I just dont see the benefit for Canadians .
 Profits and production that are exported out of our country.All the while we are getting the byproducts and pollution. Some say we are filling a need for food production but at what cost.
 Would we better to salmon ranch and produce a native species that can be caught in the wild by fishermen,similar to Alaska?
The jobs lost in aquaculture could be made up in the newly created ranching and fishing industries for the benefit of all local people.

[shuswapsteve]

Well if you have some understanding about IHN you know that it's distribution goes beyond BC waters, that it has existed here longer than aquaculture has been here (and will still exist here if net-pen aquaculture was not), that there is no evidence that it is implicated as the cause of Fraser Sockeye productivity, and that it is a federally reportable disease which BC fish farms are mandated by law to follow.  Keeping pressure on? I just told you it's a federally reportable disease. Do you know what that means?  Look into it. Maybe do a search of IHN on this board as this has been throughly discussed.

It's not in the best in the best interest of fish farmers here not to monitor for or test for IHN because Atlantic Salmon don't have the resistance that Pacific Salmon (adults) have for the virus (IHNv). Since 2003, farmers here have employed new strategies to help combat these outbreaks. One of them is to destroy the fish in their pens if IHN is suspected BEFORE it is confirmed by CFIA. And because you are familiar with IHNv you understand that it is more than likely that wild Pacific Salmon spread it to the Atlantic Salmon?

[shuswapsteve]

Rook, you don't see the benefits of fish farming here because you are not looking hard enough. If you did you will see that their is tremendous benefit for those communities on Vancouver Island. As for ranching salmon here....again do you know what salmon ranching is and have you read up on the concern about its impacts? 

[salmonrook]

Well if you have some understanding about IHN you know that it's distribution goes beyond BC waters, that it has existed here longer than aquaculture has been here (and will still exist here if net-pen aquaculture was not), that there is no evidence that it is implicated as the cause of Fraser Sockeye productivity, and that it is a federally reportable disease which BC fish farms are mandated by law to follow.

I understand that its a native disease to bc and that our pacific salmon have a natural resistance to it ,the atlantic salmon do not , so tell me who is the intruder then ? Long live the wild pacific salmon !
  Do you really think the multinational companies would care about  IHN virus if it didnt have the potential to wipe out their salmon crop?
Still not saying this has anything to do with Fraser sockeye, too me thats a cycle of good years and bad years depending on environmental conditions they face .
 As far as 'employed new strategies to combat' reads 'antibiotics' which in the end (pardon the pun)are pollution for our coastlines.
 Yup keep this issue current and the regulations will be strict, we have our pristine coast to protect.
 

[aquapaloosa]

I understand that its a native disease to bc and that our pacific salmon have a natural resistance to it ,the atlantic salmon do not , so tell me who is the intruder then ? Long live the wild pacific salmon !
  Do you really think the multinational companies would care about  IHN virus if it didnt have the potential to wipe out their salmon crop?
Still not saying this has anything to do with Fraser sockeye, too me thats a cycle of good years and bad years depending on environmental conditions they face .
 As far as 'employed new strategies to combat' reads 'antibiotics' which in the end (pardon the pun)are pollution for our coastlines.
 Yup keep this issue current and the regulations will be strict, we have our pristine coast to protect.

Maybe you missed these.

http://salmonfarmscience.com/2014/10/21/aquaculture-antibiotics-study-needs-more-context/
http://salmonfarmscience.com/2014/02/27/antibiotics-in-aquaculture-getting-the-facts-straight/

[aquapaloosa]

Yup keep this issue current and the regulations will be strict, we have our pristine coast to protect.

I think decades of misinformation tactics is catching up with the anti salmon farm movement.  Wolf wolf!!!  lol

[troutbreath]

 "One of them is to destroy the fish in their pens if IHN is suspected BEFORE it is confirmed by CFIA."

That's after they stuff to the gills with antibiotics right.

Aquaplotza your links to shmarmsalmonfacts.con are hilarious thanks for the chuckle.

quote from shmarm:

"Unfortunately, while this new study looked at five common species, including farmed American catfish, it did not look at any aquaculture-raised American salmonids. This is a glaring oversight"

Actual report:

"In the new study, 27 seafood samples were examined for the presence of antibiotics. The samples represent five of the top 10 most consumed seafood varieties in the U.S.: shrimp, tilapia, catfish, swai, and Atlantic salmon."

"Five antibiotics were present in detectable amounts: oxytetracycline in wild shrimp, farmed tilapia, farmed salmon and farmed trout; 4-epioxytetracycline in farmed salmon, sulfadimethoxine in farmed shrimp, ormetoprim in farmed salmon, and virginiamycin in farmed salmon that had been marketed as antibiotic-free. "

I think the wolf was calling their dirty fish antibiotic free, right. Looks like another coffin nail in the net penners pack of smokes.

[absolon]

Hey bonehead......antibiotics aren't used to treat viral diseases......they are only used for bacterial infections......get your facts straight.

[troutbreath]

So your feeling they wouldn't use them OK. Just like doctors never use them on colds.

[absolon]

You might think that its a wise idea to use expensive medicine that is guaranteed not to work on fish that are going to be culled anyway but salmon farmers are more than a bit smarter than that.

[troutbreath]

Why would a net penner use expensive antibiotics? They would cheap out. I think you already know that and are trying to be a smartypants. When your working at the pen do the math.

[salmonrook]

Unfortunately, while this new study looked at five common species, including farmed American catfish, it did not look at any aquaculture-raised American salmonids. This is a glaring oversight, considering that billions of them are raised in aquaculture facilities and released every year on the Pacific coast.

It would be very interesting to see what sort of amounts of antibiotics are used in Pacific salmonid enhancement facilities in Canada and the USA.

Sorry but who's spreading misinformation now, this doesnt say anything relevant about our industry.
 I didnt miss these , from the salmon farm paid for spin doctor website , no thanks , I'll read my own info and draw my own conclusions .

[shuswapsteve]

I understand that its a native disease to bc and that our pacific salmon have a natural resistance to it ,the atlantic salmon do not , so tell me who is the intruder then ? Long live the wild pacific salmon !

The "intruder" is one that has no natural resistance - adult wild Pacific Salmon do and have lived with the virus for centuries. Nevertheless, IHNv has caused severe, acute disease in juvenile Pacific salmonids (i.e. fry); however, just the mere presence of the virus does not mean that the host has or will develop the disease (IHN). So what's your point - really?

Do you really think the multinational companies would care about  IHN virus if it didnt have the potential to wipe out their salmon crop?

Well, if there was no way that you could ever be hit by a car while walking across an intersection then I guess you wouldn't care too much about it.  However, we know that situation isn't really realistic - neither is that fish farm companies are not concerned about IHN outbreaks.

As far as 'employed new strategies to combat' reads 'antibiotics' which in the end (pardon the pun)are pollution for our coastlines.
 Yup keep this issue current and the regulations will be strict, we have our pristine coast to protect.

You are misinformed.  Antibiotics don't work on viruses, like Absolon said.  Sorry...you can't change that fact unless you have powers of divine intervention.  If you have those powers it would be better to save them for the Vancouver Canucks if they make it into the Stanley Cup playoffs.  Secondly, where did I mention "antibiotics" as part of those new strategies?  I didn't. Since the IHN outbreak in 2003, fish farmers here learned that they needed to act more proactively to prevent the spread of the virus to other farms. It can take a couple of weeks to get confirmation of the disease from the CFIA. In the time between the first suspicion based on clinical signs of the IHN and confirmation by the CFIA, IHN infection could have spread from the initial site to multiple sites via workers and/or shared equipment (i.e. boats).  The cost and loss of farmed fish could be even more substantial.  If IHN is suspected there are procedures in place to destroy the farmed fish even before disease confirmation is received. When fish farms in Canada take this proactive approach they are not eligible for compensation under the Health of Animals Act.