Dear Member of the Legislative Assembly of British Columbia:
I am writing to ask you; why do we have salmon feedlots in British Columbia?
You are no doubt aware of the public response to salmon feedlots and hopefully you know it is in trouble in every country where it operates http://farmsalmonfacts.blogspot.com/.
Is the provincial government renting the seafloor to this industry to benefit the public with jobs?
British Columbians don’t eat farm salmon, so we are not doing it for food.
Jobs, however, are a good reason, but if jobs are the reason there is an obvious way out of this mess. Clearly wild salmon have a future in BC and you don’t want to be a government that harms their enormous contribution to this province, as an increasingly rare and valuable asset.
We can only count “direct jobs” because the “indirect” salmon feedlot jobs may not actually be viable without the wild fisheries and the growing tourism industry.
Source # of jobs
Recent Salmon Farm ad ………………………………………………………6,000
Price Waterhouse Cooper April 2009………………………………………………..2,800
Economic and Social Impact of Aquaculture in Canada (DFO, 2009)………2,220
Phone call to Seafood and Aquaculture Information specialist (MAL 2011). 1,259
This is quite a large range of numbers, but the fourth is the most current and from the provincial Ministry of Agriculture and Lands, who are the keeper of fish farm numbers.
Today’s seafood markets hinge on sustainability. More and more stores are refusing to sell fish products listed as unsustainable. Fish species raised in tanks are given favourable ratings, while feedlots dumping their manure onto the seafloor are rated poorly.
In response, there are tank fish farms, of many species, springing up throughout Canada, not because they were forced to do this, but because they are making money. There is a man in Quebec growing 15,000 heads of lettuce per week on the waste from the 600 pounds of trout he also raises per week (Northern Aquaculture Nov/Dec 2010). The waste that net pen operators pour into the ocean is actually a valuable product that can be used to make food and money. Just because the three big industrial operators don’t want to change, does not mean the industry isn’t changing around them. The Norwegian salmon feedlot corporations are dinosaurs harming their own industry with their aggressive unwillingness to evolve.
I don’t see a problem. There are no losers here. There are serious and valid concerns about impact of salmon feedlots in the ocean and it is big issue in BC. We have 1,259 people in BC who know how to grow fish.
If jobs are the goal, don’t allow yourself to be bullied by corporate campaign supporters. It is your responsibility to BC to encourage a diverse, local industry that BC can be proud of, benefit from emerging markets and give people in the industry a future, as well as, benefiting the wilderness tourism industry and wild fisheries.
So my question remains why do we have salmon feedlots in British Columbia?
Comments
5 responses to “Why Do We Have Salmon Feedlots in BC?”
There is a different way to farm fish – I have sent the info to the Cohen Commission – they have passed it on to their lawyers.
The first Article admits the problem of current feedlot salmon http://www.ecoagriculture.org/case_study.php?id=77
but it goes on to tell about a fish farm that cleans the water and provides jobs and tons of fish. I have more info on my blog – Please let people know that we have the potential to do this here – Even in the Shuswap this could be a viable option.
http://www.priscillajudd.ca/thexpress/?p=1485
Thanks for keeping on Alex – best good luck and hope for fallowing the fish farm waters soon. Can you ask the Commission for an order to do that?
Cheers
Please do not be so arrogant as to presume and indicate that you speak for all British Columbians. You do not. Further to that as a registered biologist in BC you are not suppose to malign or call down other scientists work. You do so on a regular basis. Frankly Ms Morton if you are so disenchanted with BC why are you still here ? Again don’t assume to speak for me and the thousands of other people who don’t support your constant effort to slag salmon farming. Sincerely, Annie Paddle.
And of course you won’t allow this comment because you stack the deck by making it appear EVERYONE just has good things to say about you.
You also do not speak for me either, Alexandra. You also are incorrect about the latest research study which indicates a virus. There has been absolutely no delay in this research as you elude to or conveniently imply. Nonetheless, it gives the public the false impression of what is going on.
The truth is that Scott Hinch’s group has been doing this work on sockeye for the past 10 or 12 years now. Where have you been? This work is multidimensional with a abunch of different things going on – including genetics. It was spearheaded by the early entry of Late Run sockeye to the Fraser River in the late 90s and the subsequent high prespawn and enroute mortality. Researchers like Hinch have been trying to find a cause to this. They along with DFO staff that assist them are a great group of people that have always been willing to talk about what they have been doing. This group has had numerous studies published in journals like the Canadian Journal of Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences. Where is the secret?
The reason why many in the public have not heard about this until now is primarily due to the fact that this stuff was not great media material back in 2006. This would have never acheived the same about of attention before 2009. Now that this briefing note comes to light everyone thinks it is was a big secret being kept. Now it makes for great media coverage and conspiracy theories. You should also remember that this briefing note was obtained by through Freedom of Information legislation so if someone wanted to keep it quiet then they would have done away with it a long time ago. The fact that it is out and available means that no one was trying to keep this secret. Perhaps you should be more upset with the media for not letting you know sooner.
You also have to realize that the data at the time was likely preliminary, raw data. Information was likely passed up the chain, but there was nothing conclusive at the time. One of the dangers of releasing raw data or preliminary results is well demonstrated by your blog and many others that profess to be informative on this subject. There are valid reasons why findings just don’t get released right away and it is not that people want to be highly secretive. It is intended to prevent preliminary data from being misquoted and misused for alternative motives. As predicted, researchers such as Ms Miller are now caught up in a PR circus. You may want to be an activist/biologist, but the people in Hinch’s group are RESEARCHERS doing important work and should not be dragged into some conspiracy theories to further your own cause.
I hope this clears up any misconceptions you previously held with this research.
Steve do you know why the farm salmon were not tested for this purported virus? This is a $1 billion fishery and the mainstay for many First Nation communities and others. We need to know what this is, if it can be stopped and is it harmful.
The salmon farms were not tested because there is no known virus. It is just a theory at this time and you know it. Why do you promote lies and hysteria ? What’s wrong , are your American funders getting anxious because your loosing the battle ? And don’t try and promote yourself like some ultra important entity to the Cohen enquiry because frankly my dear that’s what is , The Cohen enquiry NOT the Morton enquiry >