Print

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

[troutbreath]

I guess the only option we have when we fish out the wild is to farm them. Why in many cases does the farming start after the wild has been fished to near extinction and not before? Hence hatcheries, farms, the volunteers on garbage clean up and salmon stream enhancement. Even the person that picks up his buddies beer can. We are all fish farmers in the end.
http://youtu.be/m4r9XC6Ta-s

Well I guess your one of the few fishfarmers  who gave money to Morton. Very interesting. Maybe you'll go full circle.

[Fisherbob]

Well I guess your one of the few fishfarmers  who gave money to Morton. Very interesting. Maybe you'll go full circle.

How did I know you would say that TB. You are certainly one of a kind that sounds like a Hubbard that is talked about here. One of Mortons relations dont ya know.
http://youtu.be/0QsCrFANMzc

[salmonrook]

So you're suggesting the FDA don't know what they're talking about?

They have approved many many products in the past and sometimes the approval has more to do with who's lobbying for them, I trust the Canadian standards more because we are traditionally more conservative .

[salmonrook]

Steroids??  Please elaborate.

Wild salmon eat lot's of antibiotics, along with loads of contaminants ... sadly they are part of the food chain nowadays.  Whatever antibiotics you, your neighbor, or your mother uses goes down the toilet and ends up in.. yeah you guessed it, the ocean and eventually in wild salmon.
Know any lady using birth control pills?  Guess where that estrogen and other hormones end up ... yeah, right again, in that wild coho you ate last night.

Wow , you are really stretching the comparison here, comparing SLICE to the all the environmental pollution that unfortunately continues to affect all fish in the ocean ,including those in FF.

[salmonrook]

   You have your work cut out for you if you are against gmo's in feed TB. Good luck on that.

http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/processed_foods/153.animal_feed_genetic_engineering.html


http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/grocery_shopping/processed_foods/32.genetic_engineering_meats_sausage.html

This one just may cure your troutbreath.

http://www.gmo-compass.org/eng/news/497.enviropig_makes_its_d%E9but.html


https://gmoanswers.com/

Most corn is gm to be resistant to pests, the problem is that eventually this is no longer effective and this gets modify more and it escalates.
 The enviropig was developed in Canada at the U.of Guelph,last I read they had dropped the program because of lack of interest and lack of funding.

[Fisherbob]

They have approved many many products in the past and sometimes the approval has more to do with who's lobbying for them, I trust the Canadian standards more because we are traditionally more conservative .

Does that mean you trust salmon farming standards in Canada more than in the US?

[salmonrook]

They are certainly better than Chile and Norway,but still lots of room for improvement ,hopefully the new govt limits there expansion (pollution)
 I like the salmon ranching method in Alaska but don't know enough about the Wa state farms to compare to Canadian methods.

[Fisherbob]

They are certainly better than Chile and Norway,but still lots of room for improvement ,hopefully the new govt limits there expansion (pollution)
 I like the salmon ranching method in Alaska but don't know enough about the Wa state farms to compare to Canadian methods.

i feel the same as you that any industry should strive for the better. Also i feel it is up to us to keep up to what they have already done to do so. Nobody knows much about Washington's Atlantic salmon farming because Doc Morton's home country is not on her or her crusaders radar. They will not bite the hand that feeds them.
 Fyi on ranching.
http://www.alaskasalmonranching.com/

[shuswapsteve]

   " Explain where this is mentioned in the Suzuki commissioned report as one of the cumulative impacts mentioned?"
 Its not and I am not the one mentioning the report , its you, to me that report is very vague in facts.
I get my info from other sources.You seem to mention the reports that have little to no backup with data .
 Here are 2 .
   http://www.artsandopinion.com/2005_v4_n2/slice.htm
 I mentioned this one before .

https://www.watershed-watch.org/2012/11/nine-year-study-confirms-sea-lice-outbreaks-on-farms-cause-wild-salmon-declines%e2%80%94better-farm-management-a-short-term-solution/

Yes, I did mention the Suzuki commissioned report because up to this point you have not answered my question on where you are getting your information from.  I keep asking but you keep dodging.  I brought up the Suzuki report (a report commissioned by an environmental non-governmental organization that openly opposes open net pen aquaculture) to see if you could find where antibiotics and chemicals are brought up in that report as one of those cumulative impacts.  It may appear “vague” because the authors at that time believed there were multiple factors involved and that there was no direct evidence that available to suggest what particular factor caused the reduced survival of the 2000 brood in that area of the Broughton.  From that standpoint, the authors are not that far off because if you had read Cohen (Remember that report I use with little to no backup with data…lol?  The one with testimony from Dr. Randall Peterman…That guy with no data to backup his claims either?) you would have noticed that he didn’t conclude that sea lice, on a different front, were the main cause of Fraser Sockeye declines.  I suggest that your opinion of the Suzuki report soured when it did not fully implicated salmon farms, so then it became “vague” and not worth mentioning anymore.  First time I heard someone on this board that opposes fish farms disagree with a report commissioned by a group that opposes fish farms.

Unfortunately, “Arts & Opinion” is an opinion piece – not a scientific study.  In fact, that website (dated 2005) contains no scientific references for the information it uses.  It also talks about salmon farms in Maine which is a different regulatory environment.  Cypermethrin is not even used on BC fish farms to my knowledge.  It provides no context about the use of SLICE in BC such as frequency, conditions it is applied, or other management strategies.  However, considering this is opinion piece is from 2005 I am not surprised that it is not current with what is going on today with fish husbandry.  Antibiotic use on BC fish farms has decreased by more than half since 2005.  It is actually 50 to 5 grams per tonne nowadays.  It also provides no context about the frequency and what conditions antibiotics are used.  Most of the feed provided to BC farmed fish contain no antibiotics.  So much for this source of information.

The use of in-feed antibacterials in BC salmon aquaculture (1995 to 2012)
http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/reporting-rapports/health-sante-eng.html

The study from Watershed Watch Salmon Society website you provided was the kind of example of a scientific study I was looking for.  It is actually fairly similar to a particular study (with data to back it up) produced by the collaboration of scientists that are involved with BAMP:

http://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0060096

The authors in the above study (note who the authors are) suggest that: Adapting the management of parasites on farmed salmon according to migrations of wild salmon may therefore provide a precautionary approach to conserving wild salmon populations in salmon farming regions.

Wow, people from different perspectives and backgrounds working together to put science first.  Note the similar authors from the study you provided.

Here is another study (with data to back it up) that has come out at the same time (see below).  Salmon farms may harm wild salmon, but it is not certain according to the authors because of other considerations mentioned in the study.  They recommend that salmon farmers and fish managers continue to be proactive in what they are doing now which includes fallowing of sites.  You may be interested to read near the end what the authors have to say about SLICE.

https://salmonfarmscience.files.wordpress.com/2012/06/sealice_2012_phil-trans-r-soc-b-2012-brauner-1770-9.pdf
http://rstb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/367/1596/1770.full (same study but in a different format)

[shuswapsteve]

So why have 60 grocery chains across N.America rejected it ,including the biggest Costco .Fact is their is no requirement for them to label it as GMO .So you are taking away consumers right to chose. We don't know the dangers that these gmo products have on health and until their has been solid science to prove out that there is no risk to human or animal health then I applaud Costco for taking such a position .

If grocery stores are not carrying these fish it is not because they are not safe to eat.  It is more than likely due to misinformed activists using fear mongering tactics to scare the public into signing petitions or directly contacting the stores to stop selling it.  Fact is there are many foods you are likely eating right now that are GMO or have feeds that are GMO.  But I agree with you that they should label these fish appropriately and tell the consumer what they are.

For instance, wild salmon taken in mixed stock fishery using gillnets should be labelled as such.  They should do DNA/scale work on them so they can tell the consumer what stock they potentially came from.  I am sure the consumer would like to know if they are about to purchase wild Sockeye from the Bowron or even Cultus.  What about a wild Coho from Louis Creek?  The same would apply with Alaskan ranched salmon which is marketed as “wild” but it certainly is not.  They should call these ranched fish what they really are and not use a fictitious term as “wild”.  The consumer should know what they are getting there would you agree?

I do not believe any amount of science will sway your opinion of GMO.  The FDA did its due diligence while you have presented nothing to “back up” your concerns that we do not know the dangers.  If you believe their science on this is not solid then perhaps you can tell me specifically where it is not solid.

[shuswapsteve]

They have approved many many products in the past and sometimes the approval has more to do with who's lobbying for them, I trust the Canadian standards more because we are traditionally more conservative .

Do you mean that you will trust them up to the point they deviate from your perception of GMO fish?

[chris gadsden]

http://www.news1130.com/2015/11/22/first-nations-group-wants-govt-to-address-fish-farm-concerns/?utm_source=Watershed+Watch+Email+List&utm_campaign=8ec16497ac-Salmon_News_Nov_25_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_405944b1b5-8ec16497ac-166912013

[chris gadsden]

http://www.thetelegram.com/Living/2015-11-21/article-4344942/A-better-way-to-farm-salmon/1?utm_source=Watershed+Watch+Email+List&utm_campaign=8ec16497ac-Salmon_News_Nov_25_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_405944b1b5-8ec16497ac-166912013

[aquapaloosa]

http://www.news1130.com/2015/11/22/first-nations-group-wants-govt-to-address-fish-farm-concerns/?utm_source=Watershed+Watch+Email+List&utm_campaign=8ec16497ac-Salmon_News_Nov_25_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_405944b1b5-8ec16497ac-166912013

Nice atlantic salmon they used in that photo.    LOL

[Dave]

http://www.news1130.com/2015/11/22/first-nations-group-wants-govt-to-address-fish-farm-concerns/?utm_source=Watershed+Watch+Email+List&utm_campaign=8ec16497ac-Salmon_News_Nov_25_2015&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_405944b1b5-8ec16497ac-166912013

Old news that has already discussed here, or did you not read it?
Beat me to it aqua More shoddy journalism.