Print

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

[Fisherbob]

No I think you would be an excellent choice to handle that file, please keep us updated how you make out.I know SS and Dave as well will be pleased to hear about your findings.

I will leave it to you Chris. You seem to have the time and enjoy stirring the pot. Also you seem to have no problem with salmon farms in Washington. Perhaps you can give the BC farmers a few pointers on how farming should be done.

[chris gadsden]

I will leave it to you Chris. You seem to have the time and enjoy stirring the pot. Also you seem to have no problem with salmon farms in Washington. Perhaps you can give the BC farmers a few pointers on how farming should be done.

Disappointed.

[Fisherbob]

Disappointed.

I know how you feel Chris. Doc Morton would most likely be choked at us if we pointed our finger at what her country does.

[chris gadsden]

Saw this on FB.

"The industry continues to spread false information about itself and it's products.

 In this article, Jeremy Dunn of the BC Salmon Farmers Association said there’s a lot of rhetoric and misinformation about the industry.

 Yet he feeds that rhetoric with misinformation of his own. He says:


 "Atlantic salmon, as compared to several species of Pacific salmon, naturally maintains higher fats as it has the ability to spawn several times.”

That may be true in natural wild populations of Atlantic salmon (which, btw, are not native to BC) but the farmed Atlantic salmon raised in BC are never allowed to spawn. They are a single generation crop, raised from fry to market size then slaughtered, so they can never get to the stage where their "natural fats" build to the levels he implies. But they are fat ... no doubt about that. They are fat because the can't move around like normal healthy fish and their fat content, and flesh colour, is controlled by additives in their feed.

He says:

 "B.C. salmon-farms creates 6,000 jobs on Vancouver Island and produces $800 million in economic activity for the province".

Wrong again Jeremy.

 Recent BC aquaculture statistics compiled by the BC government show that the finfish aquaculture industry employed only 1700 people in 2011 and stated that the overall trend in employment in the industry was downward decreasing by 10% from 2000 - 2011 (see Page 33: http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/…/FisheriesAquacultureHuntingT….

 Also, federal aquaculture statistics show that total aquaculture production in BC for each year over the three years period 2011 - 2013 has amounted to only around $450 million per year (range $409.1 million - 475.8 million) See: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/stats/aqua/aqua-prod-eng.htm"

[chris gadsden]

Only in Norway.

Maybe not.

http://aquaculturedirectory.co.uk/bc-norway-mirror-images-salmon-farming-disaster/#sthash.g8FIyTaV.INNIAgd4.dpbs

[Dave]

Maybe not.

http://aquaculturedirectory.co.uk/bc-norway-mirror-images-salmon-farming-disaster/#sthash.g8FIyTaV.INNIAgd4.dpbs

yawn ... come back with something relevant to BC or Washington.

[shuswapsteve]

That may be true in natural wild populations of Atlantic salmon (which, btw, are not native to BC) but the farmed Atlantic salmon raised in BC are never allowed to spawn. They are a single generation crop, raised from fry to market size then slaughtered, so they can never get to the stage where their "natural fats" build to the levels he implies. But they are fat ... no doubt about that. They are fat because the can't move around like normal healthy fish and their fat content, and flesh colour, is controlled by additives in their feed.

Well, technically Dunn is correct. Perhaps he should have clarified what he meant (wild or farmed), but the guy replying on Facebook already doesn't like Dunn so it doesn't really matter.  As for Atlantic salmon raised in BC are never allowed to spawn....well, that's kind of silly statement because of course they don't spawn like wild salmon, but they are "spawned" nonetheless or farms wouldn't have any broodstock.  It's just done differently. How does he think fish hatcheries work? As for fats, wild and farmed salmon have the good fats needed to help prevent heart disease.

Wrong again Jeremy.

 Recent BC aquaculture statistics compiled by the BC government show that the finfish aquaculture industry employed only 1700 people in 2011 and stated that the overall trend in employment in the industry was downward decreasing by 10% from 2000 - 2011 (see Page 33: http://www.bcstats.gov.bc.ca/…/FisheriesAquacultureHuntingT….

First, if you read Section 6.2.1 Measuring Employment in Aquaculture on page 33 it cautions people on how they should use these estimated employment levels. Kind of important to mention. Secondly, he needs to consider the secondary employment generated by aquaculture activities - those businesses that supply goods and services to them. After the tanking of the forest industry you can bet that places like Campbell River look more at aquaculture now for economic activity.  Thirdly, these stats likely include all forms of aquaculture including shellfish.  Lastly, the aquaculture industry likely has had a uncertain future with the controversy over the last 5 years or so regarding impacts on wild salmon so new farms applications were put on hold.  Hard to generate more employment if you can't grow. Canada is only in competition with other countries like Chile so that could have contributed.

Also, federal aquaculture statistics show that total aquaculture production in BC for each year over the three years period 2011 - 2013 has amounted to only around $450 million per year (range $409.1 million - 475.8 million) See: http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/stats/aqua/aqua-prod-eng.htm"

What stats is he talking about? Again, aquaculture includes shellfish, not just finfish. Secondly, taking only a small snap shot in time like 3 years is not really telling because when you take a longer time scale (like 10 years) it shows how the industry (finfish) has grown. There is a reason why he only chose 3 years because if he looked what total "finfish" aquaculture production in BC was in 2002 and followed up to and including 2013 his argument would have looked weak. Lastly, recent production values are likely tied to the competition with other countries and recent moratoriums on new farms. Nevertheless, places on North Vancouver Island likely appreciate the economic activity this provides, in conjunction with the sport industry, since the reduction in the forest industry.

[chris gadsden]

yawn ... come back with something relevant to BC or Washington.

I am very afraid it could become relevant here too, that is what is my concern.

[Dave]

I am very afraid it could become relevant here too, that is what is my concern.

So, you're afraid of escaping farmed fish?  What about the millions of Atlantic's that have been deliberately planted in west coast waters that were not successful??

[chris gadsden]

So, you're afraid of escaping farmed fish?  What about the millions of Atlantic's that have been deliberately planted in west coast waters that were not successful??

You are getting as bad as the Liberals, always bringing up the past, when they bring up the NDP's record in the nineties.

[Dave]

Weak response Chris.  I was simply trying to learn your fears; still don't know them

[Fisherbob]

It has made me think that all the anti salmon farm crusade is just a poor marketing scam in the sites you post Chris. Never do they mention the Atlantic salmon farmers in Washington.  I would think by now you and an American like Doc Morton would have caught on to this by now. I did. 

[Dave]

Here's another interesting tidbit regarding stocking Atlantic salmon on the west coast .. how many anti salmon farmers (Chris et al) knew this was happening

http://salmonfarmscience.com/2015/02/11/oregon-lake-no-longer-stocking-atlantic-salmon/

[chris gadsden]

http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/opinion/letters/290977591.html?fb_action_ids=10153159039856095&fb_action_types=og.comments&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%5B669659619810624%5D&action_type_map=%5B%22og.comments%22%5D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D

[shuswapsteve]

http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/opinion/letters/290977591.html?fb_action_ids=10153159039856095&fb_action_types=og.comments&fb_source=other_multiline&action_object_map=%5B669659619810624%5D&action_type_map=%5B%22og.comments%22%5D&action_ref_map=%5B%5D

Cohen's report didn't not point out any primary cause for Fraser Sockeye declines; however, it was proposed during the inquiry that a more likely explanation is that something changed in the ocean (i.e. ocean conditions), specifically the Strait of Georgia.  That's pretty general and there are caveats attached to that which Stewart should have mentioned.  So, Cohen didn't conclude that it was ocean conditions; instead there were many factors implicated as possible causes.  Clearly what came out of Cohen was that there were data gaps and the time series being used was too short to make any big conclusions on a specific cause.  Currently, there is work being undertaking to fill in these gaps (i.e. Salish Sea Marine Survival Project, Fish Health Initiative).