Fish Farm News And Science

Tuesday, 27 November 2018

GOOD NEWS POST: Links to On-land, Closed Containment, Studies, News and Papers! - Updated Aug 28, 2020

Copyright Notice
Copying our articles to share with others is a breach of our terms and conditions. To share articles, please use the sharing tools located at the top of our articles.
Email us at subscribe@undercurrentnews.com if you need expanded access.
For more information visit https://www.undercurrentnews.com/terms-and-conditions

The company has an operating facility in Poland capable of producing in excess of 400t per year, but plans to produce 260,000t from new facilities in Japan, France, China, Brunei, Lesotho, and the US. Each new location will have annual production of ...

321. Reassembling Salmon Aquaculture - Dr. Charlie Mather: link to come.

Comprehensive overview of the RAS technology behind land-based operations

Detailed profiles of dozens of land-based companies and RAS suppliers

In-depth look at the sector's development in Asia, China and the United States

Exclusive interviews with investors

21-article collection of the most recent and insightful IntraFish articles on the sector."

A focus on the history of land-based salmon farming
Detailed overview of how RAS technology works
A cost comparison between land-based production and traditional netpen production
A listing and profiles of the largest RAS technology suppliers
A listing and profiles of the world’s land-based salmon producers
An examination of the investment rationale for and against land-based farming
A 21-article collection of the most recent and relevant IntraFish stories related to RAS

153. American Salmon to be Vertically Integrated - on land USA, will raise, process and ship its fish: https://www.undercurrentnews.com/2019/08/29/salmon-processing-veteran-looks-for-farming-partner-on-egg-to-retail-pack-us-ras-operation/?utm_source=Undercurrent+News+Alerts&utm_campaign=d2e4531035-Americas_briefing_Aug_29_2019&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_feb55e2e23-d2e4531035-92426209. Aims to produce 60,000mt on land, as first step, then double it. ""The $150m would finance the first stage of 15,000t, he said, adding: "We would then have the space water and treatment plant to be able to put another four of these [15,000t units] on our site. So, our site has the capabilities to produce 60,000t with its existing water supply and treatment plant. This could be expanded by another 60,000t with another 100 acres next to us having been committed to us and agreed with our local partner and state officials."" This is a terrific article and you should read it, as it has many angles that on-land operations don't necessarily have. For example, his dog treats from byproducts will mean having profit on day one of operating. And it has a rundown on other on-land operations in the USA.

84. New 'Post Smolt' On-land RAS Production - Grieg, Norway, $36M: https://www.intrafish.com/aquaculture/1807813/new-usd-36-million-post-smolt-facility-opens-doors?%20Aquaculture%20Newsletter&utm_term=0_ec4b681694-9626b71d0d-244877629.

83. On-land RAS is Taking Over - hasta la vista in-ocean: https://www.intrafish.com/commentary/1806842/letter-ras-will-oust-traditional-salmon-farms?fbclid=IwAR3xvh_Wt9JspuHFpiQJ-qsQCee6Q3ZmTcKkJG3CSwyHxTs9Kof-93gAO0Q. "I have 10 years of experience in Chile producing salmon in different recirculated aquaculture systems (RAS), and in response to Lola Navarro's article ("Will the land-based aquaculture bubble burst?"), I can tell you this: mega-RAS Atlantic salmon production projects will oust traditional farms.

There are a range of reasons. In southern Chile, the salmon industry is being increasingly rejected due to the pollution its open netpens generate, and because of the immense returns pharmaceutical companies are making by selling and using antibiotics and anti-parasitics to the industry. Low salaries and bad working conditions are also a factor in the opposition to the sector."

Monday, 26 November 2018

Southern Resident Killer Whales – Sport Fishers and ENGOs, Updated Dec 15, 2018

Responding to the Nov 19, 2018 TC article: Orcas are on the precipice, by Misty MacDuffee and Chris Genovali

Having read the text put out by environmental non-government organizations (ENGOs) for some time, the impression I get is they are not fully plugged into historical and current salmon numbers and issues. My experience on the sport side is that sport fishermen are more informed of the long-term issues because of on-going involvement with Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO). I refer to bodies such as the Sport Fish Advisory Board, Sport Fishing Institute, Pacific Halibut Commission, Pacific Salmon Commission, the Salish Sea science project, in part from the Pacific Salmon Foundation and so on.

Recent science on killer whales (SRKW), chinook numbers and other science issues is relayed in an informative talk by scientist Dr. Andrew Trites, and Dr. Brian Riddell of the Pacific Salmon Foundation (PSF). See the video: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/10/lets-take-global-look-at-srkw-problem.html.

Their take is that the problem as presented in the press is not accurate: noise isn’t that much of a problem, and new vessels are much quieter than old ones; there are 600,000 chinook returning in these waters and spot and time closures for fishing are the answer, not total closures, particularly windows for Harrison and Thompson chinook. Also, killer whale numbers have peaked and troughed four times since the 1960s. The low has been 66 animals and the high, 98. What then is the number to shoot for in terms of abundance? 100?

Surprisingly, the speakers point out that the SRKW are in our waters only 2.5 months of the year. The jurisdictions where they are resident 80% of the year need to step up, with ENGO input, to put more chinook in the sea.

In my opinion, the big four big issues facing salmon, and thus killer whales, are: freshwater habitat restoration, DFO, fish farms and climate change. Sport fishers have the ear of DFO, but we have seen them do little for more than four decades. See: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/05/dfo-salmon-and-killer-whales.html.

We need ENGOS to join us in telling the feds to get fish farms out of the water, and to engage in the province’s Wild Salmon Secretariat program; I have argued, the most important thing to do is for BC to fund freshwater habitat restoration by giving money to the PSF that leverages restoration funds 4 to 7 times. We can have a made in BC solution, and not have to depend on the feds, chiefly DFO, anymore.

The suggestion of curtailing sport fishing 100%, is not only unnecessary, but it has many large negative consequences that I don’t think ENGOs have thought through. Just so they know: it is largely sport fishermen, along with school children in some areas, that do freshwater habitat restoration – the most important thing – and maintain small satellite fish plants. If we can’t fish, no one will do the habitat work. We need help.

Furthermore, the sport fishery, in saltwater and freshwater, brings in $2.52 billion dollars revenue annually. Curtail the fishery, and the most important voice for wild salmon is silenced. In addition, many will sell their boats and stop fishing. To keep a boat moored and operating in saltwater is about $10,000 per year. Who will do that if they can’t fish? That $2.52B will take a big hit. I already know one guide at Oak Bay Marina who is selling his boat. This is happening right now, and that revenue supports many small coastal community businesses that will go bankrupt, some 8,400 jobs – five times as many as in fish farms.

Sport fishermen are the voice for salmon, engaged 12 months of the year, for the past four decades. If they are cut off from fishing, this voice is lost. What we need is for ENGOs to join forces with us and push for change.

Moving now to solutions: we need 10 years of 12 netpens of 2 million sterilized chinook fry each to pump some chinook back into the water as quickly as we can – Nitinat, Cowichan and Robertson Creek stock. Triploiding renders them sterile and thus they do not cause genetic problems on spawning beds. They don’t even go into rivers as netpen fish return to the site of the netpen where they can be retrieved from the water and donated to First Nations. Remember, if we dither, it is those years plus four years to adults.

I suggested to the Georgia Strait Alliance that they operate a netpen for the three weeks it takes to feed fry before sending them off. I was told they did not know how. I shook my head and moved on.

As for hatcheries, the science of epigenetics which means the genetic material that gets turned on or off depending on the environment can be used to create wild/hatchery fish by out-planting into lakes, enhanced environments, with hiding spots and natural feed such as stoneflies, smaller or larger fry, or earlier or later release. Check out the programs at the Nitinat Hatchery west of Cowichan Lake.

The video also points out that we need a seal/sea lion cull because they have doubled over historic levels and are now responsible for eating chinook and coho fry in numbers of 40 to 47% respectively. That means half the fish we and nature release are currently killed before becoming adults for killer whales.

The reality is that we have seen DFO manage salmon into extinction for the past 40 years, and without the ongoing voice of fishers, salmon numbers will spiral to nothing. We need ENGOs on our side. Please think of sport fishers as allies not enemies.

Finally, I contribute to a dozen ENGOs, so my heart and my cash is in the environment.

A few relevant posts:

1. Epigenetics: http://onfishingdcreid.blogspot.com/2018/01/epigenetics.html.

2. Another post on epigenetics: https://onfishingdcreid.blogspot.com/2018/11/epigenetics-case-for-wild-enhanced.html.

3. A wild salmon plan: http://onfishingdcreid.blogspot.com/2018/03/wild-salmon-plan.html.

4. The BC Stats Table of jobs/revenue is in this post: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2017/09/fish-farms-are-small-in-bc-jobs-and.html.

And, a few more:

1. Basic information on Killer Whales: https://www.mmc.gov/priority-topics/species-of-concern/southern-resident-killer-whale/. You will find more links at the bottom of the article.
2. On ship noise: https://www.hakaimagazine.com/news/commercial-ships-could-be-quieter-they-arent/. This contrasts with the Trites/Riddell video above.
3. A graph that points out that chinook catches in the Fraser have declined over the years: http://www.pac.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/fm-gp/fraser/docs/commercial/albionCHcumulativetotal-eng.htm.
4. Human impacts on orcas and salmon: https://davidsuzuki.org/story/human-behaviour-is-at-the-root-of-orca-plight/. This one has generic text, some of which contradicts the story above, but I find it less persuasive.
5. Here is an article on what is happening in Washington State with respect to SRKWs and chinook salmon: http://nwsportsmanmag.com/governors-budget-proposal-includes-unprecedented-1-1b-for-orcas-salmon/.

Saturday, 24 November 2018

Fake Science by DFO - Riddell Response

You may have read about DFO's new Rapid Science Response: http://policyoptions.irpp.org/magazines/october-2018/will-new-fisheries-minister-respect-salmon-science/.

And you may know this process is a radical departure from the way peer judgement works. The SRS is solely about DFO being unwilling to do anything about farmed salmon, such as put them on land.

It is too bad for BC that DFO has any responsibility for BC salmon, meaning DFO in Ottawa. It is time for BC to take over responsibility for wild Pacific salmon, with a dozen netpens, each of 2 million sterilized chinook and BC putting money into habitat restoration through the Pacific Salmon Foundation. See how badly DFO has done over the decades, managing wild salmon into extinction: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/05/dfo-salmon-and-killer-whales.html.

The RSR nixes the research on PRV (Piscine Reovirus) showing it causes jaundice/anemia in chinook. The same DFO lab, Genome BC, has also shown that PRV leads to the big killer HSMI. Yes, you got it right: one side of DFO is doing the research, while the other has hatched a scheme to say it is BS.

Here is the document in question about PRV that DFO is criticizing even though DFO scientists did the science: https://www.watershed-watch.org/B_Rapid_Science_Response_re_PRV-Jaundice_study_Review-3.pdf. It is De Cicco et al.

Note that the a previous post on this site, October 15, 2018, covered the law on the precautionary principle, which deals with a situation like this: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/10/precautionary-principle-has-defined.html. You will note that DFO refuses to use the precautionary principle and save wild salmon.

This is Dr. Brian Riddell's response: https://www.watershed-watch.org/BR_letter_re_SCA_review.pdf.

In summary he says this: "As a partner in the Strategic Salmon Health Initiative undertaken by Genome BC, DFO Science and the Pacific Salmon Foundation, I support having the best possible scientific review of our SSHI findings. However, I must address concerns over a recent internal report that presents DFO Science Advice in response to a request submitted by DFO Aquaculture Management Division. I am referring to an evaluation of the relevance of the Di Cicco et al. 2018 (1) publication to the testing and management of PRV in British Columbia; signed by yourself on June 27, 2018. My concern for this process/report is not the request for regulatory advice, but for the review process and exclusion of the primary authors or any independent reviewers."

Riddell was previously a BC DFO scientist, who subsequently spent years in Ottawa, and came back to BC as CEO of the Pacific Salmon Foundation. Dr. Kristi Miller is the well-known scientist at DFO, Genome BC, who has done good work on PRV, the Viral Signature, HSMI and other work, such as developing a system to test 46 different viruses/bacteria in a single sample. As in well respected.

Riddell goes on to say: "The study authors were not informed of this review and they were not provided the opportunity to respond to criticisms of their study methods."

So, internally DFO did not peer review the work, did not follow their SRS guidelines and their public comments have lead to tarnishing the authors "Certainly, the reports has now unfairly led to targeted comments in the media about the DiCicco et al. paper and researchers involved."

For me there is deja vu moment here, just as in Matrix with Neo seeing the cat, in the 2004 article in Science by Hites et al that showed farmed salmon in Scotland was filled with cancer-causing and other chemicals.

In response to that, the government in Scotland did not take action to stop the problem. Instead it joined industry, media, fish farm established organizations around the world, SOTA, (Salmon of the Americas) for example and so on to trash the science and eliminate any possibility of solving the problem.

See the Miller post below, which is where I came into this issue, because I found it so disturbing that government, scientists etc. destroyed the science, even though it was true. Just like DFO.

Here is my post on the Prof David Miller book: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2011/10/key-document-fish-farm-tactics.html. This post is updated to 2017, when I got in touch with Hites and he provided some graphic images you will find in the post.

Back to Riddell: "and are at odds with government commitment to open, objective and transparent science. Further, in non‐government circles, this will again be criticized as contrary to a precautionary approach."

You will know from reading this site that I have come to view science with respect to fish farming as: naive, hubris or a manipulation. I say this, even though my background is science and I favour science, but not in the fish farm world, as I follow fish farms globally, and they have been refining their techniques for 50 years, and each place they come to looks at things only with respect to their own circumstances, and thus get manipulated.

In the absence of the science view, the argument that holds the day, is the precautionary principle, and you can read my post on how the method works (link above). BC can simply move to save wild salmon and among a 'robust suite' of measures put fish farms on land.

We could eliminate the licence cost, or even offer a cash incentive to move out of the water - just like Norway where the companies are from. After all, in-ocean is a decade out of date. On-land is hot and of course, there are are those 255 on-land RAS systems around the world right now: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2016/05/152-different-on-land-fish-farm-systems.html.

Back to Riddell. He asked Di Cicco et al to comment on the RSR 'report' on their science. The rest of the response is their considered opinion. You can read it. It is science heavy, but takes 10 minutes and is worth the extra reading to understand just how well diseases are known, and the methods used to develop that knowledge.

Tuesday, 20 November 2018

On-land Fish Farms. Debate? John Paul Fraser?

I am sorry, John, but there is no debate. My list of on land fish farms has 255 different farms, comprising 20,000 actual on land fish farms around the world. See: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2016/05/152-different-on-land-fish-farm-systems.html.

On-land fish farms have been around for a decade, in-ocean are old-tech. You know this because fish farm companies monitor my site - 10 seconds after I put up a post, Marine Harvest et al, in Norway, receive it and go: "Not Reid again, we'll have to invent even more spin."

So, some answers to your Times Colonist op-ed: "Challenges of land-based fish farms must be part of the debate"

Well, John, you no doubt know, only 3 of those 255 plants, Atlantic Sapphire, Whole Oceans and Nordic Aquafarms, all setting up on land in the USA, at 225,000mt at grow out, will be more than 200% the size of the BC industry. As consumers now want on-land, they will wipe out your US market - unless you are on land.

John: One in five people working for a BC salmon farmer is of First Nations heritage.

A: The Union of BC Indian Chiefs says 90% of aboriginals don't want fish farms in the ocean. Both Bob Chamberlin and Stewart Phillips have said this. As below, even if 1 of 5 were correct, that is only 164 jobs. This is peanuts compared with the wild salmon economy.

John: A 2017 study found BC's salmon farming industry supported 6,600 jobs.

A: I looked at the study, commissioned and paid for by fish farms, and found they used Stats Can and BC Stats figures; however, they decided to bump the BC Stats by 50% and add them to Stats Can. Sorry, that is false.

Note that BC Stats started with Stats Can figures, then decided they were inflated. The report has a long section on the caveats on the original statistics, and what they did to amend them. Not so the industry document.

BC Stats says 1,700 multiplier jobs. That means the industry figure is 390% too high. That is it is false.

And John, I did my own investigation and found there are only 820 actual jobs in BC fish farms. That means, even if you were being fair and truthful, there are only 164 aboriginal jobs in fish farms in the entire province. That is very few.

John: the food salmon farming provides is important. Almost three quarters of the salmon harvested in BC each year is raised on farms.

A: The food is important to fish farms companies who make very high profit. The food is only afforded as a luxury by the first world mouths, most of the world's people can't afford it. And it takes 5.76B forage fish to feed one harvest in BC to harvest.

Wild salmon are pressured by many factors today. Here is my list; freshwater habitat restoration, DFO, fish farms and climate change. We need to use the precautionary principle, and take fish farms out of the ocean, and BC needs to fund habitat restoration through the Pacific Salmon Foundation.

Here are the profit margins in Norway:

In 2016

In 2017

John: it provides a sustainable alternative to eating wild fish, which are under ... pressure from overfishing, climate change and loss of habitat.

A: 1. No it kills 5.76B wild fish to bring in one crop. And it is a net loss in protein as it kills protein to make protein: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2016/10/fish-farms-kill-billions-of-wild-fish.html.

2. And the science says wild salmonids are killed to over 50% in countries with in-ocean fish farms: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2013/01/fish-farms-kill-more-than-50-of-wild.html.

3. And the Sea Around Us document on the reduction fisheries to produce your fish feed says of the top 20 wild forage fish species, 19 are either collapsing, poorly managed or both: http://www.seaaroundus.org/doc/publications/books-and-reports/2016/End_Use_Reconstruction_Report.pdf.

Norway has been singled out by this document as wiping out the jack mackerel off Chile, to feed fish farm fish. That is not sustainable. It is killing off salmonids and ocean forage fish.

John: The science tells us that ocean-based farms and wild fish can coexist successfully.

A: see the item directly above this one. Your assertion is false.

John: Our industry is responsibly managing issues such as sea lice.

A: Go look at this post about Cermaq/DFO mismanagement of lice in Clayoquot Sound in 2018: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/11/the-silent-spring-syndrome-clayoquot.html. And as for diseases, it is furunculosis for Marine Harvest, IHN for Cermaq and Grieg Seafood, with the latter losing a quarter of a million salmon in 2018 to an algal bloom. In Atlantic Canada, the CFIA has found ISA a dozen times in 2018 and the year is not yet over: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/10/isa-in.html.

And DFO is so conflicted, it has to be sued to prevent PRV virus fish that fish farms put in the water. This is not responsible management on fish farm or DFO's part: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2017/07/dfo-has-to-be-sued-to-prevent-diseased.html.

John:"There is also an opportunity to advance more closed-containment systems in the ocean to complement the expansion in aquaculture needed to meet growing human demand.'

A: Marine Harvest is spending $100M in Norway for closed containment and on land. However, fish farms version of closed is tanks that save them from lice, but allow them to pass sewage, disease and so on, out from the tank.

Norway gives out free licences to set up on land they have grown so fed up with in-ocean fish farms, that now want to pollute on a global level by setting up in the open ocean and spew far more waste than currently. Old-tech fish farms in Norway have piles of up to 45 feet of sewage under them.

In Norway, the most recent licences for in-ocean sold for, get this, $32- to $40-million, that's how much profit there is in the business. See: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/08/increase-license-fees-to-32-to-40.html.

As for growing demand, that is because the industry makes so much money they can advertise globally, put up fake news sites, put up fake sites of supposedly innocent individuals doing posts on how badly fish farms get treated and so on. Go back and read just how manipulative global fish farms are about controlling their industry spin, on the chemicals found in farmed fish in Scotland: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2011/10/key-document-fish-farm-tactics.html.

And John, let's be honest here, the BC industry uses the same PR firm that taught tobacco CEOS not to know that cigarettes cause cancer, decades after the rest of us did. See: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/07/fish-farms-big-tobacco-pretty-much-same.html.

And also see: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/02/big-toobacco-big-fish-farms-pretty-much.html. You can find the third article on this site yourself.

John: I welcome the minister's call for feasibility review on closed containment. 'Ocean farmers are innovators, by nature and in nature.

A: It is sad that DFO in Ottawa does not get that fish farms are a sunset industry in BC, and that no one wants them in the water anymore.

As for being innovators, fish farms only make changes when the public complains about their problems. They are reactionary. If they were not, they would all be on land by now. Everywhere fish farms go the public comes to overwhelmingly reject them. See this global list:
https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2017/05/global-citizens-call-for-on-land-fish.html.

A current example from Tasmania is Huon taking its nets out of the water early after a disease issue that made the government say they had to get out: From my BAD NEWS BITES post: 375. Protests - Huon, Tasmania moves pens early, diseased fish: https://www.seafoodnews.com/Story/1122191/Facing%2DProtests%2DHuon%2DAquaculture%2DMoves%2DPens%2Dout%2Dof%2DNorfolk%2DBay%2Da%2DMonth%2DEarly

By the way, my BAD NEWS BITES is almost uip to 4,000 problems in the global aquaculture/fish farm industry in three years, that is how bad fish farms are. Here is one post: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/08/bad-news-bites-aug-20-2018.html.

John:The International Salmon Farmers Association, has cited no fewer than 16 studies saying all on land 'carries environmental challenges... for land, water and electricity.

A: John, part of the reason that people don't trust fish farms is that they do self serving studies, like the one you cite. And the one that had the fictitious number of jobs in BC, that I took apart at the beginning of this post.

And, here is my post on 255 on-land fish farm systems around the world: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2016/05/152-different-on-land-fish-farm-systems.html. When there are 20,000 actual on-land fish farms around the world, don't you think it looks a bit silly to claim it can't be done?

And that post is lead out with dozens of studies that show on-land is better in a cost comparison base, and also has all those environmental benefits of not using the ocean as a free, open sewer.

*************

One more thing: Tromso, in Norway, Nov, 2018 has just refused to have anymore in-ocean fish farms. It is fed up with the environmental damage of in-ocean fish farms. Going forward, all new fish farms have to be on land: https://itromso.alda.no/bestillpluss?6&artRefId=17922088&aviskode=IT&targetUrl=https%253A%252F%252Fwww.itromso.no%252F%253Fservice%253DpaywallRedirect%2526articleUrl%253Dhttps%253A%252F%252Fwww.itromso.no%252Fpluss%252Farticle17922088.ece.

Friday, 9 November 2018

Pure Salmon - 8F Asset Management - 260,000MT - ON LAND

Yes, that said 260,000MT, making it almost triple the size of BC's entire industry. And all on land around the world. They are now putting together a 20,000MT plant project for the USA and a 10,000MT plant for Japan, called Soul of Japan. They have already built a plant in Poland with AquaMaof, who will supply all the on-land farms they build.

And it is about saving the oceans from fish farms. Stephane Farouze chairman and founder of 8F Asset Management says this: “We believe that RAS technology will be the leading driving force for growing salmon in a resource-strained world, where producing sustainable food without further damaging our oceans is paramount.” (See quoted text below).

Thank goodness. The industry is paying attention to my post on the 255 different on-land fish farms around the world that I have found, and taking decisive action. See: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2016/05/152-different-on-land-fish-farm-systems.html.

I don't usually simply just quote an entire article, as it has copyright and I am a writer to whom that is important, but I make no income from this process, and do so so rarely, I hope FISHupdate will understand.

Here is the link, if you wish to read the article on line: https://www.fishupdate.com/global-roll-out-of-land-based-salmon/.

The link with the Stephane Farouze quote above is from another fish farm industry news org: https://www.fishfarmingexpert.com/article/private-equity-firm-launches-260000-tonne-ras-mission/.

In BC fish farms are still trying to say there is no problem with sea lice, when around the world, the rest of the industry has been making the move to land, for as much as a decade now.

Here is Pure Salmon:

Global roll-out of land based salmon

Posted on November 8, 2018 by Jenny Hjul • 0 Comments

PLANS to establish land based salmon farms across the world have been launched by Pure Salmon, an enterprise set up by finance company 8F Asset Management, using RAS (recirculating aquaculture systems) technology pioneered by Israeli specialist AquaMaof.

Pure Salmon said its goal was to produce 260,000 tonnes of salmon a year in facilities that are free of chemicals, pesticides, antibiotics, mercury, microplastics and pollutants.

AquaMaof already has a successful track record in building RAS facilities around the world, said Pure Salmon, which built its first RAS plant in Poland.

Fifty per cent owned by 8F’s private equity fund and 50 per cent by AquaMaof, the Polish site is now producing adult-size fish of 5-6kg.

In addition to acting as a proof-of-concept, the facility is also a research and development and training location for Pure Salmon staff globally.

The Poland facility will produce 580 tonnes of Atlantic salmon per annum, said Pure Salmon. A second facility has been recently announced in Japan.

This, costing €141.9 million, will be the largest RAS salmon farm built in Asia, and one of the largest globally.

The 137,000 square metre farm will produce up to 10,000 tonnes of Atlantic salmon annually and will be fully operational from 2021, said Pure Salmon.

The company has plans to roll out large scale facilities of 10,000 or 20,000 tonne production per annum in the US, Europe, China and around the world.

All Pure Salmon land based sites will be fully integrated with on-site hatcheries, grow-out systems and processing facilities.

Stephane Farouze, chairman and founder of 8F, said: ‘We’re delighted to be launching what is the most exciting global development in land based Atlantic salmon farming.

‘We believe that RAS technology will be the leading driving force for growing salmon in a resource strained world, where producing sustainable food without further damaging our oceans is paramount.’

AquaMaof is also currently building an advanced RAS hatchery and nursery facility for Grieg Seafood in Marystown, Newfoundland.

This plant will produce seven million smolt ranging up to 1,500 grams. Grieg NL will stock 11 sea-cage sites for the subsequent grow-out and expect a harvest of 33,000 tonnes of Atlantic salmon by 2023.

Friday, 2 November 2018

Most Popular Posts - October, 2018

Here are the most popular posts by readers in October.

1. Precautionary Principle has Defined Approach: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/10/precautionary-principle-has-defined.html.

2. Toxic Sea Lice Chemicals - Norway is a Disaster Zone. This was far and away the most popular post of the month: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/09/toxic-sea-lice-chemicals-norway-is.html.

3. DFO, Salmon and Killer Whales - Also a very popular post, ten thousand page views so far, and the first of two on this subject: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/05/dfo-salmon-and-killer-whales.html.

4. Let's Take Global Look at the SRKW Problem - the second post on this subject, a wide ranging post: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/10/lets-take-global-look-at-srkw-problem.html.

5. 254 On-Land Fish Farm Systems - the perennial favourite on this site: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2016/05/152-different-on-land-fish-farm-systems.html.

6. Sustainable Wild Salmon Future? Well, No: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/10/sustainable-salmon-future-well-no.html.

Thursday, 1 November 2018

The Silent Spring Syndrome - Clayoquot Lice, DFO, Cermaq Transparent as Mud

See the study on Clayoquot Sound lice: https://livingoceans.org/sites/default/files/Lice%20report%20final_0.pdf.

Now see my post on the effects of lice treatment chemicals on wild animals in Norway, at concentrations far below their used levels: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/09/toxic-sea-lice-chemicals-norway-is.html. This is what I call the Silent Spring Syndrome, i.e., government/industry/chemical manufacturers saying that the chemicals are not harmful, while science ultimately shows that they need to be stopped because at concentrations far below use level are killing wild animals, for example, crustaceans.

Just how bad are current lice levels, and are they killing wild salmonids?

Well: "Clayoquot Sound used to support healthy populations of sockeye, chinook, coho, chum and pink salmon. Monitoring of wild juvenile fish during the spring 2018 out-migration, conducted by the salmon farming company Cermaq whose farms were responsible for the outbreak, captured a single pink salmon and no sockeye. A few juvenile Chinook were captured but released without examination.

Forty percent of the coho and chum that were examined in their study were infested with sea lice, with one chum reported as having 43 sea lice on it. One to three sea lice can kill a juvenile salmon. Sixty percent of the infested chum carried more than two lice. Independent monitoring found 96 percent of wild juveniles carried lice, with an average of 8.04 per fish. Lice counts ranged as high as 50 per fish."

And the well known SLICE used to kill lice has prompted resistance in lice: "By 2017, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO) unquestionably knew that resistance to SLICE™ had developed in west coast Vancouver Island farms, even as they denied it."

And the resistant lice may have been spread by processing Clayoquot farmed salmon in the Brown's Bay processor, thus spreading resistant lice to inside waters such as Johnstone Strait where the Broughton fish farms are located.

And, as I have noted before, sea lice reproduce into wildly high numbers in the presence of farmed fish held in netpens. "A single farm harbouring lice at an average of 3 females per fish is capable of shedding billions of larval lice that can travel 30 km on marine currents. 3"

Do go to the report and note the studies that have proven what is being said.

Around the world it is commonly acknowledged in the industry that lice are the worst cost, to control and in terms of fish loss. Do remember Helge Aarskog, CEO, Marine Harvest, asking for help to control this worst problem, and do remember that putting fish farms on land solves the problem of lice damage, and also the cost of treatment and fish deaths.

Since this photo was published in 2014, lice problems have only gotten worse, around the world.

Now, the report turns to the issue of transparency. Industry likes to say it is completely transparent about everything, but on page 6 of this document, both DFO and Cermaq, have been non-transparent. in other words, don't believe it when they say they are transparent. The issue is lice counts, actions taken, slippery definitions of treatments, non-reporting of treatments, several months going by without treatment when the laws require action in 15 days, lice counts not being taken during treatments, then the use of hydrogen peroxide (yes, the chemical that has been causing the problems in the Norway post above), and lice levels rose above the 3 per fish level several times over the summer.

This wasn't an isolated case as five farms were treated: Plover Point, Bawden, Bare Bluff, Fortune Channel and Bedwell. Look at Clayoquot Sound on a map as it is closed at one end, as an inlet, thus it doesn't flush well, and there are 22 farms.

At Bawden the lice level rose to the exceptionally high number of 54.7 lice, yes, 54.7 lice per fish, and yes, the limit is 3. So the farms had 26M lice, and yes, downstream represent those billions of lice released.

And here is the point on resistance to SLICE and other chemicals: "Of greater concern is the pattern of peaking and troughing of lice numbers that is seen on this farm and all others in Clayoquot Sound in 2018. Sea lice numbers do not spontaneously reduce: absent some form of treatment, lice numbers just continue to go up. The pattern of peaking and troughing is strongly suggestive of repeated, ineffective treatments.

This kind of repeated, ineffective treatment actually promotes the development of drug resistant lice: lice that survive treatment and reproduce pass on the resistance."

This is exactly the pattern that Carson noted in the 1950s with regard to DDT, dieldrin, toxaphene and a couple of dozen other chlorinated hydrocarbons, as well as phosphorous based ones. This lead to the eventual banning of DDT, PCBs and so on, chemicals that are still with us today, in our livers, in our water tables, in our orcas.

Now we need DFO et al to ban these chemicals and put the farms on land.

But wait, there is more: more farms with high lice levels: Millar, Ross Pass, Dixon, Plover Point, Saranac, Bare Bluff and all the farms between the last two. And this during the out-migration of wild fry, something the industry is supposed to not have happen. (Page 8)

Page 9 has a map of the wild salmon streams on BC's coast. Just look at all of them.

On August 15, 2018 Eric Jensen, Regional Production Manager, Ceremaq confirmed that lice had resistance, and that resistance to SLICE has spread to all areas of west coast Van isle. And furthermore that Paramove 50 (hydrogen peroxide) was now becoming ineffective as well. Not only that, but that Paramove was actually killing 15% of farmed salmon exposed.

And what about DFO you ask? Ah, well their farm audit information has not been published since November 2017. Yes, this is a lack of transparency.

And it gets worse. You see, DFO covered up the trail of SLICE and resistance, a 2014 email on the issue, later being described - after redaction - as being in error. And DFO's Simon Jones initiated a project into resistance, in collaboration with Marine Harvest. While some text notes resistance, a paper has yet to be published. And DFO scientists said SLICE was ineffective in 2016, because of high water temperature. Not so, the manufacturer says it is equally effective at all temperatures.

It appears that the BC committee, Minister's Advisory Council on Finfish Aquaculture was convened, and was misled by testimony of various experts including Gary Marty of BCMAL. It filed its report in 2018 saying there is no evidence that lice are resistant to SLICE. Yet, in 2017, emails from DFO clearly show that resistance to SLICE is a well known phenomenon. Hmm.

Oh and I should add, something that I will use in a post on the new Wild Salmon Secretariat, Jeremy Dunn, ED of the farmers association was on the Minister's committee. In other words, the committer of the crime was part of the judge and jury in the case against itself. If they don't settle this, there is no way the Secretariat is getting fish farms out of the water.

The paper says this: "The evidence points plainly to one of two things: an attempt to mislead the Minister’s Advisory Council and concerned members of the public; or an inexcusable failure to communicate critical information about drug resistance to senior officials within the DFO."

Why would DFO mislead the committee/public, you ask? Well, the report, page 15, says: "The question why the Department might seek to mislead the public or the Council on this issue is not hard to fathom: uncontrolled sea lice and the cocktail of drugs and chemicals that have been used to combat them pose risks to wild salmon and marine ecosystems that many of us find unacceptable. The advent of drug-resistant sea lice takes B.C. into an entirely new regime of lice management, in which chemicals toxic to aquatic life will be dumped into the ocean multiple times in the course of each farm grow-out cycle, with unknown implications for wild salmon ecosystems."

This is the Silent Spring Syndrome - industry/government/manufacturers claiming the opposite of what society comes to know and take action to eliminate chemicals that kill farmed animals, such as DDT has been. Many humans were killed by the insecticides/herbicides/fungicides, so make sure not to come in contact with them.

Here are some of those scientific papers we need: "In one study, exposure to salmon farms increased sea lice infection on migrating wild salmon for 80 km, killing 9-95% of young wild pink salmon on migration routes in the Broughton Archipelago26. The youngest stages of wild salmon in the Broughton Archipelago were killed by just 1-3 lice per fish27. Heavily infected juvenile Fraser River sockeye salmon were 20% less successful at consuming food than lightly infected fish. 28"

And the industry is supposed to sample wild salmon fry during the spring migration. If you look at the data it masks the levels of lice due to the way it is presented. P17

Tellingly, an independent sampler, Cedar Coast Field Station also sampled the Clayoquot fry and found 96% had lice. Also, levels ranged from 0 to to over 50. Hmm.

And the Salmosam Vet, the third drug authorized is a phosphorous based drug, http://salmosan.net/product-data/. It's chemical name is: azamethiphos. See: https://www.bing.com/search?q=azamethiphos+-+type+of+chemical&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=azamethiphos+-+type+of+chemical&sc=0-31&sk=&cvid=5FB323F0112F4333B8719FA88BE022A2.

It is a phosphorous based insecticide, in other words, exactly the kind of chemical Carson pointed out had lots of science behind its toxicity, and resistance building when used as an insecticide way back in the 1950s. Just look at her book for the studies. We need to relearn what we have forgotten.

And the killer is that the Health Canada website says Salmosan Vet shouldn't be used near lobsters, failing to note that there are no lobsters in BC, yet says nothing about the crustaceans that are here.

As an alternative, the industry has tried to zap lice in Europe with warm water, the so called, Thermolicer, or Hydrolicer. Even with warm water, lice develop a resistance. Some lice die, but the ones that survive produce lice that also won't die, in other words resistance to the lice process itself. And in 2016, Marine Harvest killed 175,000 of its fish in Scotland using the process. Look at my BAD NEWS BITES posts for several articles on the losses. Each has a link.

Here is one, item 319 in this post: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2016/07/news-bites-farmed-salmonseafood.html.

And here is a report on a series of lice treatments in Scotland, all of which, were less than successful, i.e., resistance, leading to use of another chemical that also was less than successful: "Furnace Quarry was inspected on 28th February 2017. The FHI recorded,”...Treatments: Slice in April and June 2016, Alphamax June 2016, Salmosan 2 x August 2016 and end September/beginning October 2016, Hydrogen peroxide in October 2016, Hydrolicer x 2 beginning and end of November 2016. Levels coming down post treatment but resettlement [of lice on the fish]was reported to have been quick."

Now, to end, the solution to the lice problem is, wait for it: put fish farms on land where there are none. And the money saved from not using chemicals and from not losing fish due to being killed helps make more profit, too.

***********

Okay, one more final thing, DFO said this to Global News, Oct 31, 2018: "However, there were documented failures of SLICE treatment at Klemtu in 2013 and Esperanza Inlet in 2017 and now Clayoquot Sound in 2018,” the DFO said in a statement to Global News."

Link: https://globalnews.ca/news/4615860/b-c-anti-fish-farm-group-claims-sea-lice-are-growing-more-resistant-to-drug/.

And one more: Marine Harvest uses Hydrolicer to get rid of SLICE resistant lice, Campbell River: https://www.seafoodnews.com/Story/1122196/Marine%2DHarvest%2DCanada%2DTreats%2DSea%2DLice%2Dwith%2DPressurized%2DWater%2DAfter%2DSeeiing%2DResistance%2Dto%2DSlice.

And yet another, on the global sea lice problem: https://www.intrafish.com/aquaculture/1624081/sea-lice-2018-blog-tackling-the-big-challenge?utm_source=IntraFish+Aquaculture+Newsletter&utm_campaign=0d7dcf408d-EMAIL_CAMPAIGN_2018_11_09_12_00&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_ec4b681694-0d7dcf408d-244877629.