Fish Farms Kill Billions of Fish, Updated Oct 2, 2016

(See notes at bottom, and that I give you the updated numbers of forage fish killed to feed fish farm fish in this post: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/10/fish-farms-kill-billions-of-wild-fish.html. The updated figures are: 113 forage fish killed per farmed salon.  

The updated figures are: 113 forage fish killed per farmed salmon; 67.8 million forage fish killed to feed one farm to harvest; 5.76 Billion killed to feed an industry the size of BC's to harvest. The larger figures below are those if one uses the commonly found conversion rate of forage fish to fish feed of 5 to 1. I have been convinced by The Sea Around Us that it is too high).

How many fish does the carnivore fish farm industry kill to feed their own fish? Plenty.

And like the sewage cost that took me a very long time to research and come up with a defensible estimate of $10.2 Billion in BC alone (that's what we absorb for them to use our ocean as a free, open sewer) I have spent many bleary-eyed days researching the literature for reliable forage fish stats.

Cutting to the chase, here's how bad the situation has been:

Fish farms kill 282 fish to feed a single farmed salmon.
Fish farms kill 169.5 million fish to feed a single farm in BC.
Fish farms kill 14.4 Billion fish to bring one harvest of fish to market in BC.

These are staggering numbers and more than 96% of global fish stocks have problems from fish farms killing them for fish meal and fish oil. The only one of 20 left is Antarctic krill, and that is not even a fish -  3.8%. Urgent reform has been called for by the best report I used:

Reduction Fisheries: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2016. See: http://cmsdevelopment.sustainablefish.org.s3.amazonaws.com/2016/08/22/SFP_Reduction%20Fisheries_Sector_2016-fc08787e.pdf.

The major numbers you need to compute the number of fish killed to feed carnivore Atlantic salmon are:

1.Size of forage fish and number/kg                       88.2 gms, 11.3fish/kg

2.Kg of bait fish per kg farmed salmon                  5kg

3.No of kg before salmon harvest                          5kg

4.Number of fish per farm                                       600,000

5.Number of Farms in BC                                       85

And here is the equation for BC: (1kg/fish weight = fish/kg) X 5kg X 5kg X 600,000 X 85 =14.4 Billion dead fish.

If you leave out the number of farms, the number per farm is: 169.5 million dead fish.

If you leave out the number of fish per farm, the number per farmed fish is: 282 dead fish.

And they would like you to believe they are sustainable. I don't think so. Anyone who would like to follow the links, send me a comment as my notes have a good 15 links, to back up what I am saying.

How about Marine Harvest, Cermaq, Grieg Seafood? Come on, make my day. 

Update  Sept 28, 2016 post: Link to come

Just so you know, while the kg conversion rate for wet fish to fishmeal/oil has not changed, because those 19 stocks of pelagic fish have been fished down so much, there no longer is enough to make feed with. So, fish farms are using protein and other components from plant materials as substitutes for fish that no longer exist. There are problems with that - in my next post.

So when fish farms claim a 1.2 kg feed to 1kg fish farm growth rate, they are still being deceptive, because the amount of fish has gone down so drastically, because the stocks have been destroyed.

See my next post: 

                                                           *********

Background, for keeners:

1. Percentage of forage fish killed, from Table 5 in the above reference, and average size computed from another dozen links:

Stock Fished                                                    Percent of Global Harvest               Weight in

                                                                                                                                 Grams

Peruvian anchovetta                                                                                                  

            Northern-central                                  22.1 

Chilean anchovetta

            Regions 111, 1V                                 .4

            Regions XV-1-11/Southern Peru        13.9% = 36.4% X 46.5g                   16.9

NE Atlantic Blue Whiting                              14.8     X 207.5g                               30.7    

NW African

European Pilchard, Southern Stock    3.6

European Pilchard, Central Stock      7.4 = 11% X 112g                             12.3

Chilean Araucanian Herring                           7.0 X 25g                                          17.5

Icelandic Capelin                                            6.6 X 20g                                          1.3

Chilean jack mackerel                                     5.3 X 23g                                          1.2

US Gulf menhaden                                         5.0 X 180g                                         9

Antarctic Krill                                                 3.8 X 1g                                            0

Total Average weight                                      89.9%                                               88.2g

And, number of fish per kg: 1000g/88.2g = 11.3 fish.

2. The commonly accepted number of kg of dead forage fish you need to feed a farmed salmon to put on 1 kg of weight is 5kg. 

3. Farmed salmon can be grown to harvest as large as 10kg, but I use the more common harvest weight of 5kg. This is a conservative figure.

4. Fish farms can be over a million farmed fish, but the more common average is 600,000 farm fish per farm. So, again, a conservative number.

5. Of 130 fish farms in BC, the average in operation is 85, again conservative. To put this in perspective, there are more than 1,000 in-ocean fish farms in Norway. Chile, the dirtiest country, is putting in another 100 in its southern region alone, more than the entire industry in BC. Sadly, they are now going to pollute Patagonia one of the last pristine nature areas in the world.

One more thing, fish farms like to say that fish trimmings are used in fish feed. Well, the global industry amounts to 1% of feed (2016), even though the IFFO said it was 25% (2009). See: http://www.thefishsite.com/articles/1288/production-consumption-of-fishmeal/. And the word 'trimmings' means, in English, guts and factory waste.

One more thing, the situation is even worse because Asian data is not included, including China that uses all of its own and buys more. They are still currently fishing off Peru and Chile the major areas in the world, but are taking the catch back to Asia, largely for prawns, as well as to China.

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

Here is a new paper just in on world wide fisheries from The Sea Around Us. After I read it I will make adjustments to this post: http://www.seaaroundus.org/doc/publications/books-and-reports/2016/End_Use_Reconstruction_Report.pdf http://www.seaaroundus.org/doc/publications/books-and-reports/2016/End_Use_Reconstruction_Report.pdf.

Here is another paper just in, from NOFIMA, on fish feed constituents. Once I have read it, I'll add some comments to this post, now Sept 22: https://www.nofima.no/filearchive/rapport-53-2011_5.pdf. 

Here is a news story that says the ratio of plant to fish meal/oil is two thirds to one third, respectively, because of depleted marine fish: http://phys.org/news/2016-09-environmental-salmon-farming.html?utm_source=Watershed+Watch+Email+List&utm_campaign=f84e65e777-Salmon_News_Sept_29_2016&utm_medium=email&utm_term=0_405944b1b5-f84e65e777-166907249.

At the Hitra plant, for example, cultivated salmon are fed a diet that is two-thirds plant-derived and one third fish meal and fish oil—a reversal of the previous ratio, in a bid to limit depletion of marine resources.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-09-environmental-salmon-farming.html#jCp

At the Hitra plant, for example, cultivated salmon are fed a diet that is two-thirds plant-derived and one third fish meal and fish oil—a reversal of the previous ratio, in a bid to limit depletion of marine resources.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-09-environmental-salmon-farming.html#jCp

At the Hitra plant, for example, cultivated salmon are fed a diet that is two-thirds plant-derived and one third fish meal and fish oil—a reversal of the previous ratio, in a bid to limit depletion of marine resources.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-09-environmental-salmon-farming.html#jCp

At the Hitra plant, for example, cultivated salmon are fed a diet that is two-thirds plant-derived and one third fish meal and fish oil—a reversal of the previous ratio, in a bid to limit depletion of marine resources.

Read more at: http://phys.org/news/2016-09-environmental-salmon-farming.html#jCp

On-land Fish Farms Shoving In-ocean Fish Farms Aside, Updated Nov 15, 2016

Following the tipping point in Norway that happened last year when the government became so fed up with in-ocean farms it started giving out zero cost licences for on-land farms, a subsidy of $9- to $12-million based on the auction price of an in-ocean licence, my list of on-land farms now has 162 different systems, comprising almost 20,000 on-land farms around the world.

See:  http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/04/wild-salmon-alliance-something-new.html.

Then there is the tipping point in BC where a wide ranging group came together to push for on land, as well as aboriginals giving eviction notices to in-ocean farms.

See: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/05/152-different-on-land-fish-farm-systems.html.
And, see: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/08/key-document-aboriginals-against-in.html.

And the major global conference in Norway with Canadians and others: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/07/norwegians-canadians-reject-in-ocean.html. They call in-ocean fish farms 'an ecological trainwreck'.

Now on-land is just leaving in-ocean in its unsustainable form that uses the ocean as a free, open sewer, in the dust.

See: http://civileats.com/2016/01/07/can-land-based-fish-farms-solve-farmed-seafood-woes-aquaculture/.

From this article: "More than half the seafood eaten globally is now farmed. And yet for some, aquaculture conjures up images of escaped fish, crowded pens, antibiotics, and ocean pollution in Asia, where nearly 90 percent of today’s aquaculture takes place. Now some entrepreneurs are bringing aquaculture on land. In the process, many hope to find a sustainable solution to the growing demand for a low-input, clean source of protein."

Fish for sale has increased almost exponentially: "Global production has increased from 1.6 million tons of fish in 1960 to 66.6 million tons in 2012."

Tracey Carillo started raising shrimp in the desert to see whether they could use a cottonseed protein by product, and with zero waste as it is used in hydroponics, and in others, for fuel to run the plant. He did it with the: university’s Arrowhead Center technology incubator.

Closed containment is now big business: "“Recirculating aquaculture systems have the potential to revolutionize seafood production globally,” said Monica Jain, a seafood industry expert and the founder of Fish 2.0, an annual competition for sustainable seafood startups held in Silicon Valley where Carrillo competed recently."

Start-up costs are small compared with in-ocean fish farms, coming in at $60- to $100-thousand US. Carillo is selling franchises for start up in Denver, Dallas, Scottsdale, and Albuquerque. 

And in Switzerland, on-land Atlantics are grown by Swiss Alpine Fish AG: "“There are a lot of problems with salmon farms in the sea, such as chemicals, antibiotics, and fish waste falling to the ocean floor,” said Connor who was also at the Fish 2.0 event. His system—which Connor plans to get online by the end of 2015—will recycle fish waste into biogas at an onsite plant that will power the farm."

The article cited above, also mentions Quixotic Farming and Aqua Bounty, both on land fish farms.

So, Marine Harvest, Cermaq and Grieg Seafood. Time to change or die.

Post 3: Forage Fish - Fish Farm Feed Stats - 10.2 Billion Forage Fish Killed to feed BC Fish Farms, alone, Not Counting Atlantic Canada - And Marine Harvest Operates in 23 Countries, Updated Oct 2, 2016

(Please note that I have calculated updated numbers of forage fish killed to feed fish farm fish in this post: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/10/fish-farms-kill-billions-of-wild-fish.html. The updated figures are: 113 forage fish killed per farmed salon.  

The updated figures are: 113 forage fish killed per farmed salmon; 67.8 million forage fish killed to feed one farm to harvest; 5.76 Billion killed to feed an industry the size of BC's to harvest. The larger figures below are those if one uses the commonly found conversion rate of kg forage fish to fish meal/oil of 5 to 1. I have been convinced by The Sea Around Us that it is too high. And I am satisfied that my current estimates are good figures. The really useful information below is how to calculate the weight of an average forage fish).

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

A major new report has found that fishmeal and fish oil fisheries are drastically fishing down forage fish in the oceans to make feed to feed fish farm fish for first world human mouths, not as food for third world human mouths.

See:  http://www.thefishsite.com/fishnews/28111/sustainability-issues-still-remain-in-fish-oil-fish-meal-fisheries/.

"The Sustainable Fisheries Partnership (SFP) has found in its annual sustainability overview of reduction fisheries for 2016 that only 3.8 per cent of the total catch volume of reduction fisheries comes from stocks in very good condition."

The report covers 20 of the most significant fisheries used for making fishmeal and fish oil - a catch exceeding 7.8 million tonnes - but does not include reduction fisheries in Asia because of limited data. You will recall that the Asians are fishing down the Jack Mackerel stocks off Chile that countries like Norway stopped fishing after they decimated stocks.


The report found, to March 2016:

• "Only 3.8 per cent of the total catch volume of the reduction fisheries in this analysis comes from stocks in very good condition. As in last year´s overview, this corresponds to a single fishery: Antarctic krill - Atlantic Southern Ocean.
• Most (57.4 per cent) of the total catch volume in this analysis comes from stocks that are reasonably well managed (or better) (i.e., that score 6 or above on all five FishSource criteria).
• More than one third (42.6 per cent; 3.3 million tonnes) of the total catch for reduction purposes comes from the seven less well-managed fisheries (Category C) in this overview.
• Only 14 per cent of the catch comes from stocks that score 6 or above in all criteria and the score for biomass is 8 or more, meaning biomass is at or above target levels (Category B1). This level of performance is in line with the current Aquaculture Stewardship Council requirements for fisheries providing fishmeal and fish oil for feed to certified farms (ASC 2012)."

You will note that the last item's the ASCs, from the WWF, consider this okay for certification of fish farms. In other words the ASCs mean nothing. I think 14% says it all, not too mention the 3.8%. The WWF when it was looking to bring out its ASCs asked me to comment.

I told the WWF that giving an award to an in-ocean fish farm was wrong because they need to be in closed containment on land. They sent a note back saying, yes, they understand that, but they are hoping to move toward that goal.

My experience with Norwegian-style fish farms is that the WWF is just being naive. Fish farms have no interest in moving because they get to use the ocean as a free, open sewer. Governments need to move them out of oceans that they are rendering useless for anything but algal blooms.

Not to mention fishing down fish stocks that people should be eating. Fish farms need to raise vegetarians, not carnivores.

The report: “Reduction Fisheries: SFP Fisheries Sustainability Overview 2016” – can be found here.

A parting quote: "Blake Lee-Harwood, Strategy Director, Sustainable Fisheries Partnership: “It’s unfortunate that less than 60 per cent of the volume of fish assessed by this report comes from fisheries that can be considered well-managed. This situation has not improved in recent years and there seems to be a lack of ambition in some regions."

Really? What a polite way of saying fish farms destroy ocean fish, not add to them. If you feed a carnivore 4 kg of fishmeal to put on a kg of a farmed salmon, and harvest at 5kg, I would say it is likely that you are looking at 200 forage fish killed per farmed salmon.

Here is the back of the envelope calculation: 1 forage fish = 100 grams (3.5 ounces) X 10 (1000g/100g) X 4kg/1kg X 5 (for five kilograms per farmed salmon) = 200 forage fish killed. [to come, the wet weight of fish meal, as fish are 80 to 90% water]

Sustainable? I don't think so.

Oh, and one more thing: fish farms average 600,000 fish. That means the number of forage fish killed to feed one farm is: 200 X 600,000 = 120 Million.

Let me say again, the average fish farms kills 120 million fish in the ocean to feed one farm. In BC, for 85 fish filled fish farms is: 10.2 Billion.

So, the claim by Marine Harvest, Cermaq and Grieg Seafood that they help dwindling fish stocks is completely false. They are claiming what they know to be untrue. If I can do it on the back of an envelope, what is the figure on computer models?

Sorry, one more thing, about that 3.8%: krill is the basic ocean chain, trophic level, that supports the entire food chain in Antarctica, that means major mammals like baleen whales, in the last place on earth where the final 3.8% of potential feed is in good shape.

Not for long, I'd say.

Now, to find out a weight for the fish used most commonly in fishmeal, here are some of the most important such species, and their weights. Anchovy is the most commonly used fish to make fishmeal.

Sandlance - max 10g
Capelin - max 52 g
Anchovy - 25 - 68 g
Blue Whiting - 135 - 280g
Menhaden - 24 - 817g
Jack Mackerel -
Herring - 100g
Herring - 410 - 1050g
Pollock up to 21kg

Anchovy weight, 25 to 68 grams. Here is a link. You will see that they are smaller than the 100 grams I used, making my calculation conservative:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anchovy.

Menhaden weight: 24–817 grams: http://dc.lib.unc.edu/cgi-bin/showfile.exe?CISOROOT=/jncas&CISOPTR=3888.

Capelin weight: max 52 g:  http://www.fishbase.ca/summary/252

Mackerel: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mackerel.

Forage Fish:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Forage_fish.

Sandlance/sand eels:  'While sandeel are not caught for human consumption they are harvested in huge numbers for aquaculture and the fishmeal industry. If lesser sandeel are overfished and stocks collapse the knock on effect of the lack of this humble fish will be massive.' From: http://britishseafishing.co.uk/greater-and-lesser-sandeel/.

More for sandlance/eels- 10 grams:  "Sand eels have even an economic value in the production of fish meal and fish oil. This type of factory fishing started during the seventies and is pursued by mainly Danish and Norwegian fleets in the North Sea using finely meshed trawls in the spring and summer. North Sea production has annually grossed between 400 000 ton - 1 000 000 ton since mid-1970. Because the average weight of a sand eel is about 10 gram, it would entail that about 100 billion individuals are caught during a good year!" From: http://www.vattenkikaren.gu.se/fakta/arter/chordata/teleoste/ammodyti/ammo1e.html.

Blue whiting weight - 135 - 280 grams: 'A blue whiting 31 cm long caught in spring just before spawning typically weighs about 180 g. The range is from about 135 g for a 27 cm fish to about 280 g for a 35 cm fish. In contrast, a 31 cm fish just after spawning weighs about 140 g. Rested, well fed fish caught north of Norway in the autumn weigh from about 135 g for a 29 cm fish to 340 g for a 37 cm fish. The figures are all for ungutted fish.' From: http://www.fao.org/wairdocs/tan/x5952e/x5952e01.htm.

Herring weight - 410 - 1050 grams, and the herring used as bait in BC are about 100 grams: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Herring.

Pollock wight - up to 21 kg:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pollock.

Jack Mackerel: five kilograms of jack mackerel are needed to raise one kilogram of farmed salmon.^[4] See: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chilean_jack_mackerel.

And there is that condemnation of the Jack harvest [Wikipedia]: "Geopolitical rivalries and lack of international cooperation is preventing [saving the Jack M].^[4] In an interview with the International Consortium of Investigative Journalists, the French marine biologist Daniel Pauly compared jack mackerels to American bison, whose populations also collapsed in the 19th century from overhunting: "This is the last of the buffaloes. When they’re gone, everything will be gone ... This is the closing of the frontier."<sup>[4]"

And the history, you ask? It is this: "on</sup> the eastern side of the south Pacific, the Chilean fishery operating mainly within its own EEZ has taken 75% of the global catch over the years. The Peruvian fishery captured 800,000 tonnes in 2001, but overall is an order of magnitude smaller.^[7] On the western side of the south Pacific, New Zealand fishes jack mackerel mainly inside their own EEZ, peaking modestly at 25,000 tonnes in 1995–96. From 1978 to 1991, the USSR fishing fleet intensively fished the jack mackerel belt on the high seas, taking 13 million tonnes. In subsequent years, other distant fishing nations, such as Belize, China, the Netherlands, and the Republic of Korea, have joined Russia fishing the jack mackerel belt, and by 2007, these nations were taking 18% of the global catch.^[7]There are fears the fishery may collapse due to overfishing.^[11]"

And, a very good article on global fish meal production: http://www.thefishsite.com/articles/1288/production-consumption-of-fishmeal/.

A quote from it:

'Global production of fishmeal is concentrated around a few top producers; top ten manufacturers in 2007 made up approximately 80 per cent of the global production. Today Peru is the largest producer, China the second, Chile the third and then the Nordic countries Norway, Denmark and Iceland follow as the most important producers. There are approximately 300 dedicated plants worldwide that produce about 6.3 million tons of fishmeal and 1.1 million tons of oil annually from roughly 33 million tons of whole fish and trimmings (FIN 2010). The species used in production vary from region to region, but generally speaking it consists of small, bony, pelagic fish that has little or no commercial value as fish for direct consumption5 (FAO 1986). It is estimated that about 90 per cent of the fish species used to make fishmeal is “presently unmarketable in large quantities as human food” (Bose et.al 1991). See table 2.1 for an overview of the different species used around the globe.'


More to come.

More on making fish meal:  https://www.google.ca/search?q=fish+farm+fish+meal&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&gws_rd=cr&ei=jLjUV6LAFoSyjwP19LD4Ag#q=how+to+make+fish+meal.

Fish farms may say it is not that bad because we use other things in our feed, too. Well, some of those are fish offal, guts and what gets thrown away from preparing a fish for sale, chicken feathers and their fluoroquinolones, animal excrement and so on.

I asked EWOS five times whether they used excrement in their fish feed, but received no reply. I would say that means they refused to answer whether they use excrement in their fish meal. Do you want to eat excrement? Do you want to eat chicken feathers?

Making fish meal:  http://www.feedipedia.org/node/208.

"Fish meal has been used as a feedstuff since the 19th century in Northern Europe and is now used worldwide. Global production of fish meal has been stable for the past two decades at around 5 to 6 million tons, Peru and Chile being the main producers.

A major portion (more than 60%) of fish meal produced globally is used for aquaculture (farming of finfish and shrimp). The intensification of aquaculture in Asia, and particularly in China, is increasing the demand for fish meal even though the supply cannot grow accordingly. Natural phenomena such as the El Niño-Southern Oscillation affect the fisheries along Central American Pacific coasts, leading to seasonal scarcities and increased prices. Due to these factors, the fish meal market is volatile and prices often shoot up. The search for suitable and cost-effective alternative protein sources for use in industrial aquafeeds will be the most critical factor in the development of intensive aquaculture in Asia (Kaushik, 2010; Steinfeld et al., 2006)."

And, though the report says that fish farms don't deplete stocks, it is a 2008 reference and the report cited above is 2016.

More: "The three major sources of fish meal are:

• fish stocks harvested specifically for this purpose: small, bony and oily fish such as anchovy, horse mackerel, menhaden, capelin, sandeel, blue whiting, herring, pollack…
• by-catches from other fisheries;
• trimmings and offal left over from fish processed for human consumption (unpalatable or fast spoiling) (FIN, 2008).

Fish meal is an excellent source of highly digestible protein, long chain omega-3 fatty acids (EPA and DHA) and essential vitamins and minerals (IFOMA, 2001). Fish meal quality depends on the raw material used and on the processing method involved."

Forage fish used for fishmeal are typically 80- to 90-% water. 

Marine Harvest Diseases, Wild Herring Eaten, HSMI, PRV - BC 2016, Updated Sept 22, 2016

 All disease issues in farmed salmon are solved, for wild salmon, and farmed ones, if farms are put on land in closed containment systems with recirculated water, and filtration of waste. On land systems have no diseases save the ones the stocked smolts may have, and sensibly raising such fish, eliminates such diseases.

These images are taken from the five minute Gopro video that Alex Morton took at the Midsummer, Marine Harvest farm in the Broughton Archipelago, in August 2016. This was a randomly chosen farm in a randomly chosen pen. Because the odds of this showing disease and the other issues, a reasonable person would conclude that many pens on many farms also show disease.

See the video here: https://www.facebook.com/alexandra.morton.1671/posts/1872308546331031?notif_t=close_friend_activity&notif_id=1473526423741130.  It has been viewed 750,000 times as of Sept 10,2016. This is huge interest in the well being of BC wild salmon.

The one below shows an emaciated, farmed Atlantic Salmon exhibiting the visual symptoms of HSMI/PRV. Would you eat this fish? Do you want this obviously diseased fish in BC water? I don't think so.

Meanwhile, Marine Harvest, Cermaq and Grieg Seafood cling to a semantic twist, and claim there is no PRV in BC (because a viral isolate has yet to be grown), that PRV does not cause HSMI (again for the same semantic twist) and that if HSMI were here it is caught from wild salmon, not PRV imported from Norway. Any reasonable person who looks at this two-inch-thick salmon, concludes it is an obviously sick fish. 

The second image shows a farmed fish eating wild herring inside the net. This is against the law. Do you want this to happen in BC? I don't think so. Note that the herring spawn has been eliminated in Kingcome Inlet for decades and there are 30 farms in this Musgamagw FN territory. Hmm.

The third image shows the pen's Atlantic farmed salmon exhibiting a common behaviour of farmed salmon with HSMI - they line up at the net, and sit there as they are too sick to move. HSMI stands for heart and skeletal muscle inflammation. It is easy to see why.

 

The fourth image shows wild herring outside the net eating fish farm feed that flows through the net, something that includes astaxanthin colouring, and the various PCBs, fire retardants and POPs found in fish farm feed. Do you want wild fish eating these chemicals? I think not.

Please go sign Fin Donnelly's Petition e-463 to get fish farms out of the water and set up on land. If they don't want to, they can go back to Norway and set up on land there, as Norway is also fed up with their environmental damage and is offering zero-cost licences for so doing, a $9- to $12-million subsidy, based on the saltwater auction price for a licence.

Sign at: https://petitions.parl.gc.ca/en/Petition/Details?Petition=e-463.

People who have to live with in-ocean fish farms come to overwhelmingly reject them and this is from countries around the world, as far away as Tasmania, and close by as Alaska, Atlantic Canada, Scotland and etc..........

Canadian Food Inspection Agency, Department of Fisheries and Oceans Canada, Choose to not find Fish Farm Diseases, Updated Jan 10, 2017

Earlier this year, the CFIA and DFO worked to find a lab that could not find fish farm disease. Their own lab in Winnipeg found disease, and shortly thereafter, the CFIA chose to seek another lab, one that would return a result that there were no diseases in BC fish farms.

The relevant internal documents were the object of a Freedom of Information request and to a fair, reasonable person, it is clear that they are not standing for wild Pacific salmon. Science has been manipulated for the past 40 years in fish farms around the world. Calling for science is a mistake because it gives fish farms another 5 years of open polluting of ocean waters around the world. When the science comes in, fish farms say it isn't enough and then call for more science and thus another five free years. And so on.

Read the following, particularly the internal documents, and I am sure you will agree that they are acting against the public interest. More serious words such as fraud seem appropriate. What is needed is to get DFO, the CFIA and fish farms out of the equation, and simply bring the farms out of the ocean.

They can come out of the ocean or go back to Norway, where their own government is so fed up with their environmental damage they are giving out free on-land licences, which represents a $9- to $12-million subsidy for each licence, based on the in-ocean auction price for a licence.

See: http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/2016/06/cfia-testing-for-isav-in-british-columbia-acceptable.html.

June 24, 2016

Dear Fisheries Minister LeBlanc

Thank you for your words of commitment to ensure healthy oceans and fisheries for Canadians. We share your sense of duty, and are writing to alert you to recent actions undertaken by federal government officials that appear to us to run counter to ensuring healthy fisheries. We believe that these actions put wild Pacific salmon, aquaculture and Canada’s international reputation at risk, and sincerely hope that you will give our concerns serious consideration. While the information below concerns the Canadian Food Inspection Agency, it also concerns our fisheries and aquaculture and I believe strong leadership is desperately needed.

On January 6, 2016, we co-published with others a paper reporting European strains of the Infectious Salmon Anaemia virus (ISAV) in BC farmed and wild salmon. ISAV is an internationally reportable virus, and the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) is in charge of containing it and notifying trading partners of its presence.

In an effort to understand why the CFIA refuses to recognize our published research on this highly feared virus, we requested internal CFIA correspondence on our paper under Canada’s Freedom of Information legislation. After reviewing it, we thought you should be made aware that (i) the CFIA’s surveillance for ISAV appears to be “unacceptable” to Canada’s trading partners, (ii) that program appears to be biased towards protecting industry from economic impacts that the virus can cause, and (iii) that their response could result in further serious biological and trade issues. ISAV is spreading worldwide where Atlantic salmon are farmed and is known to lie dormant for a period of years and then become highly virulent causing widespread death of salmon. Thus it is precisely the category of threat that Justice Bruce Cohen warned us of in regards to serious, irreversible potential impact of salmon farms on wild salmon.

Following the publication of our paper, it appears the CFIA became aware of concerns regarding their ISAV surveillance in British Columbia farmed salmon. In response, they contracted 1,105 ISAV tests on BC farmed salmon to be completed by the end of the fiscal year – March 31, 2016 - a very tight timeline for so many tests.

What happened next raises very serious concerns not only about the CFIA’s commitment to protecting Canada from this virus, but also protecting Canada from international scrutiny that will follow if contaminated product is discovered being shipped internationally.

In February 2016, the CFIA abruptly terminated ISAV testing of BC farmed salmon that was underway at DFO’s Freshwater Fisheries Institute in Winnipeg and hurriedly drew up a contract with a BC government laboratory, despite internal concerns that the BC laboratory may not meet CFIA standards. The DFO laboratory was instructed to return all samples of BC farmed salmon received only the week before. Senior CFIA officials prejudged that the results by the BC laboratory would be negative (email Klotins Jan 26, 2016).

Below are excerpts from a CFIA internal email train discussing the sending of samples of BC farmed salmon to the Provincial Ministry of Agriculture and Lands (BCMAL) Laboratory called the Animal Health Center for ISAV testing. These communications raise concerns about the legitimacy of what appear to be hastily prepared justifications for this “ad hoc” arrangement.

The key question is does their method meet CFIA performance requirements. If it does then proceeding with the testing would be a reasonable risk, when compared to the risk of not having the samples tested in a timely matter. Shelagh McDonagh, CFIA National Manager, Laboratory Quality Assurance and Accreditation Jan 19, 2016

“Do we need to have the BC method assessed…?” Stephen Norman, Laboratory Director CFIA, Ottawa Jan 19, 2016

“… we would need a really solid sole-source justification that only the BC lab could do this work.” Stephen Norman Jan 19, 2016
“Essentially this is the only laboratory that can meet the requirements set out in the CFIA policy,” SOLE SOURCE CONTRACT JUSTIFICATION Jan 20, 2016.

“I understand we are doing this one “ad hoc” due to the urgency to get this testing done, however for the future (if using non-DFO methods is the path we are taking), we will need to develop an official documented process for the review and approval of alternate test methods.” Maria A. Perrone, Director, National Animal Health Laboratory Services CFIA, Jan 26, 2016

“… before they start the testing, it would be good to know that the testing methodologies have been approved.” Andrea Osborne, CFIA Regional Veterinarian Jan 26, 2016
At this point, the CFIA was in their 5^th year of ISAV testing in BC, following the Cohen Commission ISAV hearings that produced ISAV results for BC from 5 government, academic and international laboratories. Why now the sudden need for the CFIA to switch laboratories? How could they justify a claim that only the BC laboratory could do this work now that ISAV had been reported in a major scientific journal, when they already had an arrangement with a federal laboratory? Why were they so adamant to use only “non-DFO methods?” Why didn’t they continue using the DFO laboratory to perform parallel tests, with the BCMAL laboratory, to provide corroboration of the results?

Specifically, we see that, even as senior CFIA managers express uncertainty over whether the BCMAL laboratory meets “CFIA performance requirements”, it was approved the very next day on Jan 20, 2016 as “the only laboratory that can meet the requirements set out in the CFIA policy.”

All previous CFIA reporting on ISAV in BC has been for wild salmon only.   This ATIP is the first evidence of CFIA testing for ISAV in BC farmed salmon. Did trading partners’ inquiries into the certification of BC farmed salmon as ISAV-free trigger the CFIA testing of 1,105 farmed salmon? If so why switch laboratories?

If the BCMAL laboratory was the “only lab” that met CFIA policy – why wasn’t the CFIA already using this facility?

On February 2, 2016, DFO Science Advisor, Candace Fisher, contacted Dr. Sunita Khatkar of DFO’s Winnipeg Laboratory and told him to halt ISAV testing on the BC farmed salmon he had received the week before and to send the fish samples back to BC to the BCMAL laboratory.   On February 16, the samples were shipped to the BCMAL laboratory.
Furthermore, the CFIA instructed the BCMAL laboratory to test only for the benign strain of ISAV, called HPR0, not for the virulent strain, HPR5, which was also reported in our paper.  

Before testing commenced, Dr. Kim Klotins CFIA National Veterinary Program Specialist - Ottawa made it clear there would be no ISAV detected in BC BC. She prejudged the results after special arrangements were made to use a controversial lab:

Jan 26, 2016 “Let’s make this very clear – this is not a new strain... there is nothing to pick up…. Nellie and Kyle have determined that this so-called variant is due to laboratory error…- my understanding is they along with [REDACTED] froMAL, will be informing the editor of Virology Journal.” Dr. Kim Klotins. to Stephen Norman, Maria A. Perrone, Shelagh McDonagh, Andrea Osborne, Melanie Sheppard, CFIA Vice President, Science; Animal Health Science
Indeed, Ms. Nellie Gagne, DFO and Dr. Gary Marty, BCMAL (but not Dr. Kyle Garver of DFO) did contact Virology Journal asking that the paper be retracted, but the journal dismissed their concerns and the paper remains.

Some CFIA staff did express concern that “this time” they needed to use a test that would capture the ISAV sequences we reported in Virology Journal. It is important to note that the CFIA had been made aware of every ISAV test result we generated since 2011. The findings we published were not new to them.

“This time, I think we need to ensure that the ISA test in use will pick up the artefact of testing that was published by Kibenge et al in Virology Journal” Dr. Andrea Osborne, CFIA Veterinarian. Jan 26, 2016

The CFIA not only redirected all samples from Winnipeg back to BC; they also went to BC salmon farms and collected 736 more samples and shipped them the short distance from Vancouver Island to the BCMAL laboratory in Abbottsford. Somehow they failed to keep these samples cool. All the ice melted to room temperature.

“We received the samples today morning. Frozen gel packs were thawed, at room temp-samples were at or slightly below room temperature… let me know whether samples are acceptable for further processing” name redacted, BCMAL
“… they are fine to be tested. They can be stored for up to a week and still be viable in RNAlater” Andrea Osborn

While the CFIA felt this was acceptable practice, we disagree. The reason scientists pack samples in ice is to maintain sample quality, which is particularly important with the ISA virus. In our view, they should have re-taken the samples and used a car to make the short trip (under 4 hours) to the laboratory to provide the quality of samples that produce high-confidence results.

On a related issue, a DFO scientist recently reported a salmon heart disease of significant legal and biological consequence in BC farmed salmon. This announcement on March 20, 2017 triggered adjournment of an appeal by DFO and Marine Harvest regarding transfer of disease-carrying farmed salmon from hatcheries into marine pens. The BCMAL laboratory, however, supports Marine Harvest’s views that this heart disease HSMI does not occur in BC, as Dr. Gary Marty refutes the finding by the DFO scientist.

We feel it is important to provide you with a critique on the BCMAL laboratory authored by eight scientists from three universities who express deep concern that Dr. Gary Marty of the BCMAL laboratory is dangerously downplaying the risk that disease in farmed salmon poses to wild salmon. Dr. Marty stated that he would respond to this critique, but we are unaware of any response. Download Critique Dr. Gary Marty

We are writing to you because we feel that the CFIA’s exclusive use of the controversial BCMAL laboratory for ISAV testing puts both wild Pacific salmon and Canada’s international reputation at risk. When dealing with a virus as potentially virulent as ISAV in the marine environment where currents can move particles 10km in 6 hours, we feel it would serve Canada to ensure that all steps were taken to prevent an outbreak. In our view the actions of the CFIA as documented in the ATIP we received, are not defensible and put Canadian interests at risk.

Given the controversy around this BCMAL laboratory and the disparity in results between this and other laboratories, it would seem in the national interest that several laboratories share the responsibility of testing BC farmed salmon for internationally reportable viruses such as ISAV. If this lab is using samples that have not remained chilled and tests that are different than those that have detected ISAV, and different than the previous 4 years of ISAV surveillance confidence in the health status of BC farmed salmon is unnecessarily eroded.

Failure to contain ISAV led to $2 billion in losses to the salmon farming industry in Chile, involving some of the same companies as operating in BC. The risk of impact is even greater in BC because, unlike Chile, we have wild salmon in addition to a salmon farming industry.
Thank you for reviewing our concerns. We hope that this information will assist you in achieving your goals to ensure healthy fish populations in Canada. We request urgent review of this matter as ISA virus is a serious concern. We remain available to provide the substantive documentation that ISA virus occurs in BC and to assist you in other ways upon request.

Respectfully,

Alexandra Morton
Dr. Richard Routledge

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

Now, since this information came out on DFO/CFIA in essence fraudulent approach to fish farm diseases, Minister LeBlanc, still claiming the false narrative. His Oct 5, 2016 Letter to Morton has an appendix that makes the false claim, even though DFO know that what they have done is counterfactual.

Here is a clip of it:

"To date, Fisheries and Oceans Canada (DFO), the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the United States government have tested over 13,000 wild and farmed salmon for the presence of the infectious salmon anemia virus (ISAV),and no fish have tested positive. The results of this testing are available online:    

 • Status Update on the Surveillance of Wild Anadromous Salmonids in British Columbia;

• DFO Fish Health Audit and Surveillance Summaryby facility; and

   •    U.S. Response to a Report of Infectious Salmon Anemia.

Recently, within Dr.Miller-Saunders' program, DFO has applied molecular assays for 45 potential salmon pathogens (including two assays to ISAV) to more than 500 hearts from farmed British Columbia salmon (collected from 2013-2014), and did not detect any reportable pathogens, including ISAV-in these salmon. The Strategic Salmon Health Initiative will continue to assess these same 45 potential pathogens across 26,000 wild, enhancement hatchery, and aquaculture salmon over the next two years, and will also follow up on any detection of reportable pathogens or microbes not previously known to exist in British Columbia."

I guess when you have a budget of $743 million, like the CFIA has, and a budget of $1,519 million like DFO has, you simply control the narrative by saying no. Hmm.

August, 2016 - Most Popular Posts on Fish Farm News - Sept 1, 2016

I have decided to start a new document on this site. It will list the most popular posts as viewed by the global audience to this blog in the month just past.

For August, 2016, here are the most popular posts:

1. Norwegians, Canadians Reject In-ocean Fish Farms, 'An Ecological Trainwreck':   http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/07/norwegians-canadians-reject-in-ocean.html.

2. Finally, First Nations Tell Norwegian Fish Farms to get out of their Territory: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/08/finally-first-nations-tell-norwegian.html.

3. KEY DOCUMENT: 142 Mostly On-land Fish Farm Systems: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2012/01/key-document-142-mostly-on-land-closed.html. Note that the list is now up to 155 on-land systems, comprising almost 20,000 on-land fish farms around the globe. Don't let the Norwegians tell you it can't be done. That is counterfactual, as they know.

4.  Bad News Bites - you may be shocked by how much bad news there is in the fish farm/seafood industry. I receive more than 20 global fish farm/seafood newsletters per week, so I am up to the minute on fish farm bad news: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/07/news-bites-farmed-salmonseafood.html. More than one hundred bad news stories in one month. The link is there to the more than 600 bad news stories I found from July 2015 to July 2016.

5. Jack Mackerel - Fish Farm's Buffalo - Unsustainable Industry. Fish feed is getting scarce as the Norwegian-style fish farms and others have fished down world class stocks that should be going to feed third-world humans, not fish for first-world mouths: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/08/jack-mackerel-fish-farms-buffalo.html.

6. Post 2: Forage Fish - Fish Farm Feed Stats: http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/08/post-2-forage-fish-fish-farm-feed-stats.html,

7. Watershed Watch - Cohen Commission - DFO, BC is Waiting for you to do Something. Are you there Dominic? Are you there Justin?:  http://fishfarmnews.blogspot.ca/2016/08/post-2-forage-fish-fish-farm-feed-stats.html.