And how do you dispute this?
I have been following this work for many years. ISA virus is a serious matter,' says Dr. Daniel Pauly, one of the world’s leading fisheries scientists, based at the University of British Columbia (UBC). 'A member of the influenza family in open ocean feedlots is a risk Canada should not be taking on the west coast.'"
I think Dr. Pauly knows more than all of us that post here but I am sure the PAPG will find some fault in this scientist.
Just because Pauly has a PhD doesn't mean he is above being questioned, Chris. In this case, the facts are very, very clear. He knows it, I know it and everyone that deals with wild salmon on a professional level knows it - there has been no confirmed cases of ISA in wild salmon and farmed salmon tested here in BC. This was dealt with at great length during the Cohen Inquiry where even the panel of experts on this (including Dr. Kibenge) all agreed that there had been no confirmed cases of ISA in ANY of the Pacific salmon tested by the time of the ISA hearings back in December 2011. Thousands of Atlantic salmon tested on BC fish farms were not positive of ISAv (this was an exhibit presented during the inquiry). Read Cohen Volume 2.
A few years later, 2 years of viral surveillance work done by the Canadian and US governments did not find ISA or ISAv in wild salmon tested. This includes hundreds of fish from the interior and the coast. However, as Dr. Nylund (a world renowned expert on ISA) said during the Cohen Inquiry, if ISA is going to rear its ugly head it will be on fish farms first. ISA is lethal to Atlantic Salmon. If it is on farms here it won't just kill a few farmed fish, but thousands. Not unlike the Chilean examples critics such as yourself frequently bring up here and in the media. Fact is that we haven't seen any fish kills of that nature on BC fish farms as a result of ISA. Fish hatched from eggs imported from other areas before were quarantined before release and nowadays farms here use their own broodstock for eggs (CK can correct me if he needs to). Scientists like Dr. Kristi Miller-Saunders found that during her retro analysis of preserved samples of wild salmon that it is quite likely that the ISAv-like virus she was seeing was around our waters before salmon farming began. I realize that they can be very uncomfortable given how much time you have invested in this, but do you honestly feel more comfortable with speculation being your guidance here? By all means be critical of government or industry, but at the end of the day you should look at what people like Morton are saying and think for yourself if it really all makes sense.
I agree with Dave that is it quite possible that a virus similar to non-virulent strain or different variant of ISAv has existed off our coast for a long, long time and we haven't really noticed it until recently because most of this sampling in the past has been done on cultured fish - not wild fish. It doesn't necessarily mean that it was brought here by aquaculture.
So, while Dr. Pauly is correct that ISA is a serious matter it needs to be balanced with relevant evidence to date here. You also have to look at the farms and see if you are seeing these massive fish kills as a result of ISA. To just say that ISA is a serious matter and implying that wild salmon are in grave danger because of it without providing some context around that is not responsible, in my opinion. Instead of seeing this as "picking apart" start looking into this more because the information is there if you choose to look for it. This is not solely coming from industry as you can see with the latest PRV study. I have not interest in leading you astray on this, but I am not going to nod my head in unison and say that diseases on fish farms are running rampant, devastating wild salmon when the evidence to date does not show that. You and many other fish farm critics seem to be hung up on "risk" and then erroneously extrapolating that as "reality" based on speculation.
It always amazes many of us that oppose FF in our oceans are always hearing from those that favor them stating everything rosie and we have nothing to worry about. 
That's not true, but I accept that as your interpretation. What many of have been saying is that these issues are likely more involved with many factors working together. To beat up fish farms over wild salmon numbers is spinning tires after awhile. Although Cohen said that fish farms can pose a risk, he didn't find the doom and gloom that many critics were claiming. Many of us look at the large abundances of Pink salmon in the North Pacific and wonder why. Many of us look at this abnormally warm water blob off our coast and want to know more about it's implications on wild salmon survival in the marine environment. Do you ever question Morton's theories or do you just take them at face value?
Of course most that say that I suppose have some invested interest in them but that is hard to prove as they hid behind some pseudonym name except Dave.
My name is always out there, on this forum anyway. 
Yes, anyone with an opinion counter to yours must have a vested interest in fish farming. That's so old and stale, Chris...lol. Maybe some of us chose to look into these issues a bit more and question the source.
Author
Topic: Get your facts straight? (Read 1689296 times)