DFO Does Not Use 'Evidence and Science' That Doesn't Agree with It's Fabricated Story - Updated Jan 28, 2020

Hi Jonathan Wilkinson et al

It is time to stop saying that DFO uses ‘evidence and science.’ When DFO deals with fish farms, it is decidedly not true. DFO uses the story it wants to serve the narrative it has, and ignores science and evidence, or won't test, say for PRV, so it has no evidence against fish farms. Hmm.

Read this post, and the dozen other examples in another post, just below this: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2019/05/cermaq-lice-peroxide-slice-paramove-50.html.

In my opinion, as bad as this is, the worst case was when DFO and the CFIA conspired to find a lab that would give you/them a ‘no disease response’ for fish farms diseases, and chose the Gary Marty one in BC, after its own, DFO, lab found disease in BC fish farms. After reading all the FOI material culled from your and the other agency, I would call this fraud. Any reasonable person calls it fraud.

DC Reid

Here is a post on DFO not using science:  https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2019/02/transparency-in-fish-farming-well-no.html.

This is the post that has almost a dozen cases of DFO not using evidence and/or science: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2019/02/evidence-and-science-based-decisions-at.html.

This is the post I mention that should be DFO/CFIA fraud: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2016/09/canadian-food-inspection-agency.html.  Jonathan Wilkinson, I want the Attorney General to investigate your ministry for fraud. And then send me the letter on the case.

Yet, another long case of refusing to use 'evidence and science' is DFO's pulling out of planned research two days before it was set to begin, by refusing Dr. John Volpe a source of Atlantic salmon from BC fish farms. 

Fortunately, Volpe found another source of fish farm salmon, and went on to research the escapes/leakage from BC fish farms, and the presence of Atlantic salmon and progeny, meaning adult fish spawned, fry were produced and both fry and adult were present in many BC rivers in following years, even though DFO maintains it couldn't/can't happen.

Here is one of the posts I did on this subject: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2017/10/escaped-atlantic-salmon-in-bc-volpe.html. I did several on Volpe's work.

Note that the shocking 'evidence and science' that DFO ignored was that Volpe found adults and progeny in 40 Vancouver Island rivers that his team swam, that had multiple BC salmonid populations, that is 97% of the rivers that he studied. This is shocking, yet DFO claims there is no 'evidence and science': https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2017/12/atlantic-salmon-in-bc-rivers-bad-news.html. This is just one of the posts I wrote, but it leads to the conclusion that at the lowest 'escape/leakage' rate of .003% (meaning a third of 1 percent) that 153,000 farmed Atlantics escape per crop in BC.

And, Google this for a long list of websites that discuss the Volpe research and escaped Atlantic salmon in BC: https://www.bing.com/search?q=fishfarmnews.blogspot.com+-+John+Volpe+Atlantic+salmon+escape+research&pc=MOZD&form=MOZLBR.

Stop making DFO look foolish, and stop using the 'evidence and science' defense, because DFO does not use science that does not agree with what it wants to do, which is put more fish farms in BC waters, even though the BC population lost patience with you a very long time ago over fish farms. I would add that anywhere in the world where citizens have to live with in-ocean fish farms, they come to hate them, because their elected governments won't take them out and put them on land.

If you like them so much, put them in the Rideau Canal in Ottawa and see how long you like them.

***

And another case of evidence being evaded:  https://globalnews.ca/video/5305357/documents-indicate-federal-fisheries-officials-cant-control-fish-farms?fbclid=IwAR2uUxPQebS1iP9MNPtAktFZ_5PSpUr7EBjEbsGpiDC7h6Xo4_YSiP1Pkbc. All that fish farms need is a plan for lice. Doesn't matter whether they use it, Jonathan. This one is DFO employees complaining about the DFO non-action to save wild salmon. AM comments.

And, yet another case: read this one for DFO four times refusing to use science and evidence over PRV:  https://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/2020/01/the-virus-prv-brings-out-the-worst-in-dfo.html?fbclid=IwAR1RVl5HttXekuttvJChNOwu51SufY3oxLT3uc7hZ_TScKjBL5nyr0siMuE.

Report: Made in BC Wild Salmon Strategy - Wild Salmon Advisory Council

The report we have been waiting for about bringing back wild BC salmon, brought to us by us, meaning a made in BC Wild Salmon Strategy is now out: https://engage.gov.bc.ca/app/uploads/sites/426/2019/03/Wild-Salmon-Advisory-Council-Report.pdf.

It has about 25 pages of text, is cut-to-the-chase stuff and you should read it. If the plan works out as described, we should be able to bring back wild BC salmon that DFO has, shamelessly, managed into extinction for 50 years.

I put some thoughts together based on parts of the report and sent it in to them. I agree with much of it, and think, that of the two criticisms I have read so far that the issue of hatcheries and genetics that the ENGOs are worried about, will be satisfactorily taken care of. The issue of not asking enough questions from the BC interior is fair, and the plan contains action to reach out to all areas of the province.

Here is what I sent in to the WSAC:

Hi Doug/Martin/Allison

I am reading the new report and am in agreement with most of it. I have a few comments/questions for WSAC:

P6: “It must also be noted that investment in scientific study and data quality and quantity with respect to wild salmon management has been significantly reduced over the past several years.”

1. Doesn’t this mean that the Integrated Fishing Management Plans for north and south BC have no factual basis?
2. I caught that you got the PSF to do a stock assessment – can you give me a link to it? Note that my overall figure from assessing DFO reports is, in an average year, 73 Million in-ocean, pre-fisheries; 38M escapement.

P8: Reference 10 - Estimate of salt sport revenue: $1B. We all use this, but I looked at fresh/salt angling and came up with $2.52B, and if Strait of Georgia coho are brought back, an additional $200M – Pacific Salmon Foundation mid-point figure. My figure is public, published by the PSF.

P12: Habitat Protection – Re laws and enforcement, don’t expect much from DFO as it has chronically underfunded this. Read Randy Nelson’s, Poachers, Polluters and Politics. He was a director of Conservation & Protection.

P12: Habitat Restoration – Yes to this. But I don’t agree to employment ops until leveraged restoration has been done. Yes, to in-stream options like spawning channels; Big Q and Taylor are terrific examples of this work, and can serve as models. The San Juan – above the Harris confluence – that blew five years ago, is an example of a river looking for a good, large spawning channel project. Any river with old channels or a flat, bottom section has this potential – high water table, willow to alder coverage.

P13: Salmon Enhancement – No to Alaska’s ‘ocean ranching’ and no to other States’ ‘springer’ approach, both of which degrade wild genetics. But, epigenetics should be used here to make ‘wild’ hatchery fry. And sterilized, fin clipped fry make for non-reproducing stock, and terminal mop-up fisheries. Yes to sterilized, clipped netpen chinook for Southern Resident Killer Whales.

P 14: Data, Research and Science – After I crunch the new BC Stats/AG report on the fishing sectors, I will turn my attention to climate change research and make suggestions to deal with the issues. I will have many novel approaches.

P15: Governance – Yes to the first sentence.

P16: Fishing – Yes to terminating the herring roe fishery.

P16: Fish Farms – BC is behind the rest of the world in putting fish farms on land. The new US plants, Atlantic Sapphire, Whole Oceans, Nordic Aquafarms and Aquabanq, aiming at 218,000mt may well put the in-ocean BC industry out of business. Globally, Pure Salmon is aiming at 260,000mt. BC is less than 100,000mt. Here is a post of on-land good news, almost 100 articles in the last 3 months: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2018/11/links-to-on-land-closed-containment.html. When you need info, ask me for it.

Note that fish farm sewage is a big cost to BC: $10.4B, my estimate makes the revenue of $777M only 7.5% of the cost.

P16: Climate Change – As above, I am working on solutions to the problem.

P18: Reference 14 - Support for the AG finfish committee on fish farms. I strongly oppose this.

P19: Strategy 1.1: Immediately: Provide support to 'provincial organizations' that are working to protect habitats.

I assume you will use the Pacific Salmon Foundation. As they leverage money 4 to 7 times, that means if BC puts in $15M each year for ten years, the cumulative effect is $600- to $1,050-million.

Without expecting DFO to do much, the simplest thing is to ask for the same amount of funding to the PSF, a drop in their $2.4B budget bucket, and they can claim to be helping out. That would make a cumulative total of $1,200- to $2,100-million in ten years.

P20: Strategy 1.3: Monitoring and enforcement. Make sure that BC does it and you don’t give any responsibility to DFO as they have done poorly and are not to be trusted. See P12 above.

P21: Strategy 1.4: Yes to both immediate tasks, and: do some restoration projects ASAP, prepare news releases and get them in the press, so the public sees the result of the WSAC process immediately.

P21: Immediate to Mid-term – invasive species. John Volpe’s science suggests that annually 153,000 Atlantics escape and are in 97% of swum Van Isle rivers. Please add getting Atlantics and progeny out of Island rivers – a good project for our indigenous brothers. I have several links to his work: https://fishfarmnews.blogspot.com/2017/12/atlantic-salmon-in-bc-rivers-bad-news.html.

P21: Mid-term: As DFO has been managing wild salmon into extinction for 50 years, I would not count on the Feds doing much. I would first get the cash for habitat restoration, and then talk about joint actions.

P22: Strategy 1.5: I would put out a news release on the selective nature of WSAC salmon enhancement plans which would ameliorate ENGO concerns.

P25: Yes to BC branding.

P25: Strategy 2.6.: Yes to better stats from BC Stats, but a separate report would be better for the ‘fishing sectors’. As noted, my estimate of salt/fresh sport revenue far exceeds what we currently use. Remember that DFO uses its stats to add more fish farms in BC. It’s revenue is only 7.4% of the sewage cost, but DFO doesn’t calculate sewage cost.

P25: Goal 3: Immediately: Yes to an on going structure within government for the Made in BC Wild Salmon Plan. The unit gets things done, and lobbies on behalf of salmon.

P26: Mid-term – Yes to an annual progress review of concrete action.

What comes next for WSAC?

DC Reid

 Allison, FYI, these are the federal Estimates: https://www.canada.ca/content/dam/tbs-sct/documents/planned-government-spending/main-estimates/2018-19/me-bpd-eng.pdf.