Tag Archives: Salmon

Fresh Evidence of ISA Virus in BC’s Wild Salmon – Alexandra Morton’s Letter to Fisheries Minister

Share

Read Alexandra Morton’s latest blog post, alerting Federal Fisheries Minister Keith Ashfield to the biologist’s recent discovery of more wild BC salmon infested with the deadly Infectious Salmon Anemia virus.

“Dear Minister Ashfield,

I would suggest you stop treating us like fools. Your attached letter is grossly inadequate. Download Initial Request for 2011-001-03100.pdf (440.4K)
Show us your Moncton test results because your lab is the only one that
cannot find ISA virus. I would also suggest you stop obsessing over
the quality of the River Inlet samples and go out and get your own
samples. You have an entire department at your disposal.

Yesterday I received yet another set of positive ISAv results for salmon of the Fraser River. Download Report231111[13].pdf (15.9K)

You can stop calling the 1st Norwegian tests a “negative” result. Be
more accurate and call them what they are – a weak positive. Download Report 021111.pdf (22.0K) You can’t wave a magic wand and make black white.” (Nov. 25, 2011)

Read full blog post: http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/alexandra_morton/2011/11/open-letter-to-minister-ashfield.html?mid=539

Share
A representation of Port Metro's Planned second terminal at Deltaport

Prominent Fish Biologist Questions Port Metro’s Expansion Plans

Share

The following is a letter from retired senior Department of Fisheries and Oceans biologist and manager Otto Langer to Port Metro Vancouver’s Sustainability Director:

Dear Mr. Desjardin – Sustainability Director – Port Metro Vancouver:

As someone that has spent 42 years of my life protecting the Fraser River Estuary I find the Port Metro Vancouver’s latest phase of its upgrading of the Roberts Bank Port facilities including the transportation infrastructure to be of great concern and is again another setback in protecting this globally significant estuary. Continued development in the Roberts Bank area and on the bank itself will reduce options for future generations to benefit from our natural environment and will again degrade the habitats of vast populations of fish, wildlife and harm public recreation and livability. Further much of the new development is dependent on encroachment on some of the best farmland in Canada and that is yet another nail in the coffin in our ability to protect our base to grow food near this large metropolitan area.

The original development of the Roberts Bank Facility in the late 1960’s was one of the greatest impacts that the Fraser River Estuary has ever suffered since the construction of the many dykes around the estuary in earlier times and after the 1948 flood. That dyke building destroyed vast habitat areas and cut off much of the estuary from what was a large and extremely productive ecosystem.

We are only now protecting a small part of the original estuary and any new development will have an incrementally larger toll on estuary health and survival. Expansion of the port facility a few years to increase coal exports and then container facilities has allowed this port facility to extend across this unique and highly productive mudflat and marsh estuarine complex like a cancer. This present proposal is not a major development but it helps set the stage for major new expansion just over the horizon.

For the concerned public to now have to face and comment on yet another round of industrial expansion is truly unfortunate especially when one considers the a state of world economic uncertainties and a present myopic drive to increase an overly exploitative phase of resource development and the export of as many raw resources as possible and then import most of our manufactured goods. The port planning seems to see no limits to future development and that should be of concern to anyone concerned about our future and quality of life.

It appears the port authority has not learned much from our history and is ignoring all signs that indicate that we must pay more attention to the issues of sustainability and respond to global warming and generally our over exploitation of the earth’s resources. I see none of that thinking in this new phase of development at Roberts Bank. The PMV seems to show little insight as related to the global picture of over development as it relates to our sustainable future as dependent on a clean and healthy environment and the protection of the limited but extremely valuable farmlands we find in this area.  The Port again seems to be driven by a development at any cost agenda and again the overall development by PMV in the estuary has to be put into its proper temporal and estuarine ecosystem context. This project is just one small impact as supported or promoted by PMV.

The above statement is not made without any foundation. The recent comments by the PMV CEO ( Mr. Silvester) in BC Business hi-lites the indifference and insensitivity and the total lack of understanding of the value of the natural environment and our agricultural land in the Lower Fraser Valley. My response to Mr. Silvester’s recent comments are attached. It is unfortunate that his comments seem to symbolize what PMV stands for and that is definitely not for future sustainability. It is indeed rather odd that Port Metro Vancouver would even have a position on staff that they call Director of ‘Sustainable Development’. Maybe that has to be defined because the Port concept of sustainability seems to leave out many aspects of the social and environmental legs of the sustainability stool. Maybe it is sustained industrial development that PMV is dedicated to.

What is most disturbing about any development at Roberts Bank is the disjointed approach PMV is taking in this new development phase at that site and indeed in the entire estuary. To make matters worse, why in earth would the Federal Government have delegated any environmental review / screening delegation under the Canadian Environmental Assessment Act (CEAA) to a port agency that is the developer that will gain financially from this development i.e. why and how can we get a proper unbiased environmental assessment when it is abundantly clear that PMV’s pro-development stance and mandate puts the Port in a total conflict of interest?

As part of the above and key to this review is the PMV ambush style of public consultation. I am informed that a few months ago Nature Vancouver invited PMV to appear at their October meeting to outline PMV expansion plans at Roberts Bank. PMV spokesperson agreed to appear some three months ago but two weeks before the event PMV backed out of the event saying their plans were not ready for public discussion. However, at about the same time the Port then listed this project for public comments and have given the public only two weeks time to respond to the planned development.

This approach should be embarrassing to any Port staff that have environmental, social sustainability or public consultation responsibilities.  This is totally unacceptable and it appears that PMV have not learned from the less than stellar environmental review PMV is conducting in harmony with the BC Environmental Assessment Office in the VAFFC Jet Fuel Delivery Proposal to ship jet fuel into the Fraser River Estuary.  In that review the PMV joint review only allowed the public 2 minutes of speaker time at the ‘public hearing’ last spring and limited written public input to a very short time period.

After protests by the public and local government, the comment period was expanded another two weeks. Despite an expedited process that was to be done about now, the public is left in the dark as to what has happened and above all doubt the sincerity and adequacy of that partnership review. Also in that project the Port is conducting the review with a more junior level of government. This is not proper when the issues related to the port, airport, fishery, navigation, wildlife, shipping, etc are all federal responsibilities. How can we trust a PMV environment assessment of any sort?

I do not know how PMV can with any degree of conscience believe they can conduct an impartial environmental review / screening process. The public and certain local governments including the City of Richmond have strongly stated that PMV cannot do environmental assessments when they benefit from the approval of the project.  Accordingly a group that is examining the joint BC EAO and PMV review of the VAFFC Jet Fuel Delivery Project has launched a petition to the Environmental Commissioner of the OAG of Canada to raise the issue of PMV’s obvious conflict of interest (attachment). This jet fuel project is very relevant in that that the conflict of interest noted in that project also is relevant here. The PMV is the wolf in charge of the sheep and that can mean the continued environmental degradation and eventual destruction of the Roberts Bank and other parts of the Fraser River Estuary.

The container and transport project now being screened is just the tip of the ice berg as related to Roberts Band port expansion. To review this part of the project in isolation of any work on the bank proper (Terminal 2) is akin to getting your foot in the door – again. This is not an acceptable review procedure in that it is obviously piecemeal and does not address the cumulative impacts of all development planned at this port facility, including the Gateway Highway Project,  as is required by the intent and spirit of the cumulative impacts provisions of CEAA. Further an environmental ‘screening’ is the lowest level of CEAA review and considering that the future of what is left of Roberts Bank natural environment and considering the impacts on the adjacent communities a higher level review (i.e.  a full Public Panel Review) is necessary.

I strongly recommend that PMV go back to square one and develop a complete proposal and an objective business case for significant expansion at this time in the face of port tonnage handled in the recent past, a realistic projection of increased port needs and relate that to the significant port development at Prince Rupert that will compete with this port. Also an objective review of the conservation future of this part of the estuary is long overdue.  Once these issues have been addressed, only then can the Federal Government, through a higher level FEARO Public Panel Review, do an objective environmental assessment that we can trust.

To date PMV has caused catastrophic damage to Roberts Bank habitats and fish and wildlife populations. Many of these populations are global in nature and truly unique and are under great pressure from past development. Further PMV has not shown that it has significantly mitigated the impacts from past development on Roberts Bank including the massive loss of habitat due to massive filling, fuel and coal dust spills, killing of wildlife by inappropriate power lines over the water directly in the paths of migratory bird populations and in the blocking of natural ocean currents, sediment transport and fish movements by the causeway.

To propose more development when past impacts have not been addressed is a way of saying that we will continue to develop regardless of environmental or agricultural or resident concerns and as we do more damage to new areas we will promise to mitigate the damage of the past. This is wishful thinking and a line must be drawn on the map because what has taken place in past development is well beyond the concept of what is sustainable development at that key estuarine habitat area.

In summary:

  • The Roberts Bank Port development as started in the late 1960s has caused catastrophic impacts on Roberts Bank natural processes, habitat and fish and wildlife populations. To date, these impacts have not been properly mitigated.
  • This environmental screening review of improved transport infrastructure at Roberts Bank Port Terminal is out of context with what is next planned and a proper review of what is planned for this area must be addressed as a comprehensive review of a complete package.
  • A proper review that can best address the intent of CEAA must be much
    more comprehensive and done at a higher level (i.e. Public Panel Review)
    and include all planned development at Roberts Bank Port to address
    perceived needs up to 2030. Anything less than this is a piecemeal short
    term review and undermines the cumulative impacts intent of CEAA and
    the public trust.
  • The stated opinions of the Port CEO in the press are bound to affect the
    thinking of all working staff at PMV including those on any
    environmental assessments conducted by PMV. Allowing an agency with a
    gross insensitivity to farmland and natural world values is bound to be
    not trusted by an informed public and that is not in the interest of the
    estuary, its life and federal responsibilities.
  • PMV is in an obvious conflict of interest due to their gain if the
    project is approved and this undermines an objective and unbiased review
    and greatly lowers public trust and the possibility of maintaining
    natural values on the remaining  and undeveloped portions of Roberts
    Bank and its backup lands.
  • The Federal and BC environmental agencies must draw a line on the map as
    to what government is willing and must protect in this valuable and
    essential part of the Fraser River Estuary. Continued piecemeal losses
    associated with an improvement of infrastructure such as this project
    must be put into context of what PMV has planned for this port site.
  • The environmental screening as applied to this project by PMV as per
    CEAA is inadequate especially as related to how the public was informed
    and the extremely short time given to evaluate and comment on what is
    indeed taking place and about what is to next take place considering
    known PMV expansion plans and attitudes stated for natural values in the
    Roberts Bank area.
  • PMV does not seem to appreciate that the Fraser River Estuary, including
    the Roberts Bank area, is an estuary of international significance and
    is one of handful of estuaries of global significance on the West Coast
    of the Americas. This alone requires an attitude of greater insight into
    how that legacy must be protected.
  • The PMV should withdraw from a leading any environmental review when
    they are the primary developer and beneficiary of the approved project.
    The Federal Government must re-evaluate why and how this terrible
    arrangement was ever allowed under CEAA. This bad precedent is now
    taking place in several projects in the Fraser River Estuary and it now
    appears that the estuary is simply treated as a port that is
    unfortunately entering a new era of industrialization. This will
    incrementally harm a very rare and unique Pacific Coast natural
    environment and promote the continued loss of some of our best
    farmlands.

 Sincerely yours,

Otto E. Langer MSc

Fishery Biologist and Aquatic Ecologist

Richmond, BC.

 


Share

Why Independent Media Needs Your Support – And How You Can Help TheCanadian.org

Share

This, dear friends, is a plea for help. Let me illustrate that with an anecdote.
 
The great American attorney, Clarence Darrow once had a client praise him asking, “How can I help?” to which he replied, “Madam, since the Phoenicians invented money there’s only been one answer to that question.”
 
The Common Sense Canadian needs your help, which is especially so when you see what we and other organizations are doing up against corporations and governments which have an endless amount of money. For example, in the struggle to keep our power in BC’s hands we are up against General Electric and both the federal and provincial governments. With fish farms we’re fighting both senior governments and an industry which is immense.
 
The same applies with pipelines and tanker traffic – the enemy is both governments and endless corporation lucre.
 
Our need is magnified many times over by the corporatization of the major media.
 
We at the Common Sense Canadian also back, wherever we can, those fighting to save agricultural land and prime wildlife preserves. There are many valiant people and organizations with which we ally ourselves and they with us.
 
The leadership provided by Alexandra Morton, for one example, has had an extraordinary impact; as has the leadership of Donna Passmore, Rex Weyler, Jennifer Lash and Independent MLA Vicki Huntington. In naming these names I must say that there are many more, like the tireless Joe Foy and Gwen Barlee of the Wildlife Committee and indeed valiant fighters all around this province.
 
Now let me make this clear – we are not overwhelmed by the forces of environmental evil. Indeed we relish the fight; we’d prefer not to have a fight but if that’s what the bastards want, that’s what they’ll get. Most of us have been up against these forces for years and we know there will be many scars to come.
 
We at the Common Sense Canadian see ourselves as an outlet for others which is why we make space available for people to express their views. I would urge you to look at the quantity and quality of regular contributors. I assure you that you’ll be impressed by those who regularly contribute – for free on a regular basis. We also encourage others to pitch a blog through our pages.
 
In the absence of a mainstream media we try to take their place.
 
The task we face is bigger than groups like us, and you who help us, have ever faced. The governments and large corporations are coming at us on a massive mission that will scar our wonderful province for all time.
 
Every time we blink another army appears – recently it’s been the “frackers” who, going deep in the ground, with a massive use of water which they pollute beyond repair in the process, to capture huge quantities of gas not available through traditional drilling methods. This hasn’t been presented to us the citizens who need to know the answers to many questions; where do you get the water? Is that water that could and should be going to farmers and hydro electric facilities? What happens to that water after its been blasted with great force during the “fracking” process? Does it get into the water table and become unsafe to drink?
 
These questions are wrapped up in the issue of Site “C”. Quite apart from the normal and serious environmental concerns, is this power going to be delivered to fracking operations, coal mines and the Tar Sands so that we use an environmental nightmare to assist the biggest polluters on the planet?
 
These and many other questions should be determined by our elected officials after thorough consultation with all citizens and after a thorough airing in the House of Commons and the BC Legislature.
 
The environmental processes in place are a terrible disgrace. I’ve said this before but I’d almost prefer a root canal without  anaesthetic than go to another. They are stacked. with all awkward questions being “out of order”, complete with a corporation-government cosiness that makes you want to vomit.
 
We can and do contribute to the common cause – just look at the great work my colleague Damien Gillis does with his camera and his insightful articles he does while I use my lungs and computer to try to get the message out. (To paraphrase the great Robert Benchley “it took me 15 years to learn that I couldn’t write but by that time I was too famous to quit.”)
 
As mentioned earlier, we the citizens face a force of environmental degradation, to the immense profit of outsiders who thus are unconcerned about environmental and, yes spiritual, matters with only the people as our soldiers. That won’t deter any of us but you can keep us in the fight with financial help.
 
Please join us, if you can, at my roast on Thursday at the Wise Hall 1882 Adanac Street where for $35 ($40 at the door) you can expect some very well known people give me the mickey as I enter my 9th decade.

Also, watch this coming Monday for the start of our Common Sense Canadian membership drive for – as we unveil our hip new t-shirt that promises to the must-have fashion item of 2012!

Share

Shades of Green: Pleading Guilty – “By their deeds shall ye know them”

Share

Perspective is an illuminating rarity that can take years to occur. Disparate pieces drift in an incoherent jumble until they begin to coalesce into a understandable pattern. Then clarity reveals connections and relationships. Insight comes out of confusion. Order replaces chaos. The pieces cohere into a meaningful whole. The design becomes obvious. Explanations are then both possible and credible. And the catalyst that makes all this happen can be something fairly small and innocuous.

Such a catalyst was a small newspaper report that Marine Harvest, BC’s largest salmon farming corporation, was pleading guilty to two violations of the Fisheries Act (Courier-Islander, Nov. 2/11). Specifically, after two years of pleading innocent, Marine Harvest was now accepting responsibility for “incidental bycatch” in 2009 at two of its northern Vancouver Island facilities. Wild salmon and herring were captured and killed during the netting and transfer of farmed fish, adequate measures were not taken to prevent, recover and release the wild fish to minimize harm and mortality, and the bycatch was neither recorded nor reported as required by law.

“By their deeds shall ye know them” – the gospel of Matthew 7:16.

In the great scheme of things, the incident may seem small. But it is symbolic, important and revealing. Witnesses were present for the obvious infraction. They took photographs, collected the wild fish from beneath the trucks, then presented the evidence to the Department of Fisheries and Oceans. DFO did not prosecute, an incredible lapse considering the violation was so obvious and the evidence so incriminating. So charges were laid by Alexandra Morton, a private citizen who decided to act when the appropriate enforcing agency would not. Furthermore, the Department of Justice apparently perceived DFO’s negligence to be so serious that it undertook the prosecution itself – “the first time the Department of Justice had made such a move with a private prosecution,” noted the newspaper report.

This simple incident raises a host of significant questions. Given the obvious evidence, why did DFO not lay charges? What was the relationship between DFO and Marine Harvest that warranted overlooking such an obvious violation of the Fisheries Act? When charges were laid and the evidence was so damning, why did Marine Harvest initially plead innocence? How does such a plea reflect on its attitude to the law, to the marine environment in which it operates its open net-pens, and to its role as a responsible corporate citizen? If Marine Harvest is capable of flagrant violations of the law and of denying obvious guilt, what other regulations is it capable of neglecting, disregarding or bending to its advantage? Does it perceive itself to be a law unto itself, a corporate body that is responsible only to its shareholders but not to the country or environment that host it?

Even worse, the federal agency that is supposed to supervise the salmon farming corporations seems to have abdicated its authority. First, DFO delegated that authority to the provinces, a transfer of power that the courts deemed to be a violation of its constitutional mandate. Now that this supervisory responsibility has been imposed by the courts, the salmon farms seem to function with impunity, as if DFO were a mere spectator rather than an enforcer of regulations. Leniency that DFO would never allow an individual violator is granted with apparent blessing to corporations: to suffocate the benthic environment with fish feces, to allow a restricted pesticide to be routinely used, to kill seals and sea-lions by the thousands (an astounding 6,243 between 1989 and 2000), to displace orcas and other marine threats with sonic scare devices, and to permit diseases and parasites from open net-pens to infect migrating wild salmon. And then, in two acts that hover somewhere between ludicrous and surreal, DFO has attempted to muzzle scientists critical of salmon farming and has allegedly financed the industry’s attempt to win organic certification.

DFO and its political masters have effectively ceded portions of the ocean to corporate control, giving them the sovereign authority to do whatever they please. Restrictive regulations are mere formalities routinely excused. And the corporations have willingly assumed ownership, not just of their leases but of the entire marine ecology in which they operate. DFO seems to measure environmental risk and damage by its inconvenience to the corporations.

This description comes close to giving shape to the situation pertaining to salmon farms in BC’s West Coast. The relationship of government to salmon farming corporations is too close and too accommodating to be healthy for society and for the environment. A loss of distinction is occurring between political and corporate interests. Supervision has become licence. While such an arrangement may benefit salmon farming employees, society as a whole perceives an unfair application of the law and suffers a loss of confidence in an agency that is supposed to protect their collective interests. The ceding of power to corporations disempowers people and erodes their confidence in democracy.

This ceding of power is the same motive force that is driving the “Occupy Wall Street” movement, an international reaction to the corporate behaviour that is bypassing democratic processes, stressing the global financial system, accentuating economic inequalities and causing environmental wreckage. The corporations that operate salmon farms in BC are now a noticeable example of this larger problem. “By their deeds shall ye know them.”

Share

Rafe on Supporting the Common Sense Canadian – Plus Our New Op-ed Blog

Share

The Common Sense Canadian has been going well over the past year-plus and this seems to be a good moment to reflect on what we’ve done, not done, and will do.
 
First please understand that we are just two people. Our funding is very limited and, to speak boldly, we need considerably more. We’re deeply grateful to those who have donated and special thanks to those who have signed on for a regular donation. We’ll be launching a special promotion next week for November and December, encouraging more of you to become monthly sustaining contributors – even $5 a month helps, as it’s funding we can count on into the future.
 
Second, one way you can immediately be of help is to attend my 80th birthday Roast on November 24th next – tickets cost $35 in advance ($25 for students) and all proceeds go to the Common Sense Canadian. (Incidentally, the name derives partly from Thomas Paine’s pamphlet Common Sense which sparked the American Revolution. Paine is a great hero to Damien and me.)
 
The most critical issue we now face comes from the success of this offering. Our “hits” and regular emails from readers tell us that we’re making contact with a large number of British Columbians and that has become a unique “problem” – more and more people want us to get involved with the war they’re having with the establishment over an environmental issue in which they are heavily involved. And, in a moment I’ll tell you what we’re going to do to assist these wonderful folks in BC and Canada.
 
For historical reasons Damien and I find ourselves with three issues that dominate our time – Fisheries, private power projects (IPPs) and power projects generally, and pipelines/tankers. This by no means dulls our concern about other issues such as the Gateway Project and its many facets, mining issues such as Raven coal project on Vancouver Island and the so-called Prosperity Mine and other issues that  so many of our courageous citizens are involved in.
 
We have set up a page called “Your Voice”, where we welcome op-ed blogs on issues we don’t regularly cover (you can read our first entry there now – a piece from David Williams, President of Friends of the Nemaiah Valley, on the cultural impacts of the proposed Prosperity Mine). This column will be accessible from our home page and also included in our weekly mail-outs to readers. I want to emphasize this – we take all these issues seriously and just because a blog is published doesn’t mean that we won’t help in other ways as well when the opportunity arises.
 
We reserve the right to edit for errors and length as well as issues of good taste and defamation – and we can’t guarantee that we’ll publish every piece. But if you have an issue you’re dealing with and would like to inform more people about it, please contact us with your proposed op-ed.
 
Damien and I welcome this opportunity to expand the horizons of the Common Sense Canadian.
 
We must be our own media in this province of anaemic mainstream media who peddle, uncritically, the establishment line.
 
Please join us!
 
Rafe and Damien
 
 

Share
Alexandra Morton testing wild salmon for ISAv on the Puntledge River earlier this week

Shades of Green: ISAv – Threat, Fear, Mystery and Warning

Share

The recent news that the European strain of Infectious Salmon Anemia virus had been found in two Rivers Inlet sockeye smolts sent a shiver of fear throughout the North Pacific region. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) dutifully notified Japan, Russia and the United States, the countries with an economic interest in the safety, security and health of wild salmon and other marine fish. The US states of Oregon, California, Idaho and Alaska all expressed alarm, one defining the situation as an “emergency”.

The immediate panic subsided with the CFIA’s recent announcement that re-testing of the sockeye samples did not find ISAv. Were the samples now too old? Had they been improperly stored? Could the original tests, done by one of the world’s reference labs for ISAv, have been faulty? Were the CFIA’s tests faulty? Why had the many tests done on farmed fish not detected ISAv? Why had the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) not been testing for the disease in wild salmon? Why did no federal agency have a protocol for responding to an ISAv emergency?

As this mystery deepens, the undisputed evidence of ISAv as an international threat was made abundantly clear. BC and its Norwegian salmon farming corporations, together with Canada’s DFO, are playing a high-risk game with extremely serious consequences. Should protective measures fail, an unleashed exotic virus in the North Pacific would be a serious international incident with immeasurable consequences and inestimable costs. Is the gamble worth it?

Meanwhile, more positive tests have been reported for the European strain of ISAv in Pacific wild salmon on the Harrison River, a tributary of the Fraser that is 600 km from Rivers Inlet. A group of worried people led by Alexandra Morton netted a dead, unspawned coho salmon. It’s heart and gill tissue tested positive for ISAv. So did the gill tissue of a “severely jaundiced” Fraser River chinook and a “silver-bright” chum salmon. Finding the virus only in the gills of these fish suggests they were recently infected with ISA (alexandramorton.typepad.com).

Undoubtedly, these tests will be contested. But, as Alexandra Morton writes in her blog (Ibid.), the arrival of ISAv is inevitable.

“I don’t know how no one saw this coming…Every country with salmon farms has taken this path. I am so exhausted with trying to explain this to Ministers, bureaucrats, streamkeepers, environmentalists, fishermen. People just don’t want to believe it…

Look, it is simple. Salmon farms break the natural laws and viruses, bacteria and parasites are the beneficiaries of this behaviour. If you move diseases across the world and brew them among local pathogens, in an environment where predators are not allowed to remove the sick – you get pestilence. There is no other outcome.

The reason I can see this, and where we are headed, is not because I am particularly bright, it is because I have taken great care not to allow myself to become dependent on anyone’s money. I am not climbing any social ladder. I don’t want to be a politician, academic, or CEO of a ‘save the environment’ company. I just want to be able to live between Kingcome and Knight Inlet and not watch it die.”

Her indictment rings too true to be refuted. The salmon farming corporations owe their allegiance to shareholders perpetually hungry for higher profits. In the particular case of ISAv, they are creating a false assurance that will eventually release its viral tragedy. Politicians in power – local, provincial and federal – are busy juggling image, votes and economic considerations. Government bureaucrats and employees are reluctant to rile their political masters. And the majority of the public don’t have the attention or imagination to comprehend and stop this promised catastrophe. The result will be yet another environmental mess.

Are we now witnessing the beginning of this shadowed future? We don’t yet know for certain. As Morton writes so candidly in her blog, she had the premonition of defeat, believing she has “failed in the mission that has consumed my life. I wish now I had put the blinders on and continued studying whales, because it does not matter how the fish die, whether by sea lice, or viruses, they will be dead.”

If the fish die, her failure will be our failure. Because we live on a planet in which all the parts are interconnected, when we threaten or diminish wild salmon, we do the same to ourselves. Their vulnerability is our vulnerability. Or, to put it more ominously, as we dismantle nature’s services, corporate services will rise to fill the void. So the gracious bounty that once was given freely will then be subject to price and profit, a cost that we will pay in currency, dignity and servitude. If ISA is now brewing in our West Coast waters, it will be a classical example of how, piece by piece and place by place, we are dismantling the ecology of our planet. Such a “pestilence” will mark an erosion of our innocence and freedom, a diminishment of ourselves that could have been prevented if only we had possessed a modicum of perspective and caution.

Morton suggests a strategy for prevention and hope. Get the salmon farms out of our marine environment. Now. Immediately. Eliminate the only known source of ISAv and the unnatural concentrations of fish that breed mutations and virulence. This may also mean closing hatcheries for wild fish, too. Should the virus be here, then maybe – just maybe – it will dilute and dissipate in nature’s forgiveness. And if it is not here, the scare was real and instructive, a useful reminder that our folly is as far away as a single virus.

Share

Canadian Food Inspection Agency Denies ISAv Infection in BC

Share

Read this report from the Victoria Times-Colonist on the Canadian Food Inspection Agency’s decision to downplay recent positive test results from the world’s top Infectious Salmon Anemia experts in Canada and Europe.The Agency defended its position in a conference call earlier today that so far they can confirm none of the positive tests that have been registered but the World Animal Health Organization-endorsed lab at the University of PEI.

“Fears that a deadly virus is infecting B.C. salmon appear to be unfounded, federal officials said Tuesday. Tests
at a specialized Moncton laboratory by the Canadian Food Inspection
Agency and Fisheries and Oceans on 48 samples of sockeye smolts found no
sign of infectious salmon anemia (ISA), said Con Kiley, CFIA national
aquatic animal health program director.

‘There are no confirmed cases of ISA in wild or farm salmon in B.C,’ he said. ‘There’s no evidence that it occurs in fish off the waters of B.C.’ The
results run contrary to tests on the same samples carried out at the
World Animal Health ISA reference laboratory at the University of Prince
Edward Island, which found two of 48 sockeye smolts tested positive for
the deadly European strain of the virus. A coho, chum and chinook also
tested positive.” (Nov. 8, 2011)

Read article: http://www.timescolonist.com/news/victoria/Virus+fears+salmon+unfounded+officials/5677781/story.html

Share

Special ISAv Session Announced for Cohen Inquiry

Share

Read this report from the Montreal Gazette on the decision by Justice Bruce Cohen to re-open his Federal Judicial Inquiry into disappearing Fraser River sockeye next month to address the discovery of deadly Infectious Salmon Anemia virus in wild Pacific salmon.

“VICTORIA — The Cohen Inquiry, looking into the decline of Fraser
River sockeye salmon, will hold a special two-day session next month
because of the possibility a potentially lethal virus could be affecting
wild salmon. ‘Testing of samples of Pacific salmon from
two areas of the province has indicated the possible presence of the
infectious salmon anemia (ISA) virus in several Pacific salmon,’ said
Brian Wallace, senior counsel for the Cohen Commission.

The
Canadian Food Inspection Agency is doing further tests on the Fraser
River coho and two sockeye from Rivers Inlet, which were initially
tested at the University of Prince Edward Island. Results are expected
in about one month. A chinook and chum salmon have also
tested positive for the virus, which has devastated fish farms in
Norway, Chile and the east coast of Canada. There are different strains
of the virus and, until now, it was believed the lethal European strain
would kill Atlantic, but not Pacific, salmon.” (Nov. 5, 2011)

Share

Cartoon: ISAv Salmon

Share

Check out this new cartoon from Gerry Hummel. In recent weeks British Columbians and concerned media and citizens around the world have been rocked by the revelation that multiple species of wild Pacific salmon are showing signs of being infected by a European stain of the deadly Infectious Salmon Anemia virus. While Canadian regulators and politicians stall, their American counterparts are calling for  emergency testing and swift action to address the potential disaster for wild salmon up and down the West coast.

Share

ISAv Now Found in FOUR species of Pacific Salmon – US Senators Have Lost All Confidence in Canadian Regulators

Share

Read this story from The Province, which reveals that four species of wild Pacific salmon – from multiple rivers systems on the BC coast – have now tested positive for the deadly Infectious Salmon Anemia virus.

“In a letter to Senate decision-makers Wednesday, Sen. Maria Cantwell
of Washington and senators Lisa Murkowski and Mark Begich of Alaska
argued the United States should conduct independent tests for the
contagious disease that has decimated Atlantic salmon farms in Chile and
Norway. ‘We should not rely on another government —— particularly
one that may have a motive to misrepresent its findings —— to determine
how we assess the risk ISA may pose to American fishery jobs,’ the
senators said.

Researchers at Simon Fraser University on Oct. 17
announced the virus was found in two of 48 sockeye smolts collected in
B.C.’s Central Coast. On Wednesday, biologist and salmon advocate
Alexandra Morton learned an ISA lab at the Atlantic Veterinary College
in P.E.I. found evidence of the virus in three of 10 dead fish — a
Chinook, coho and chum — she pulled from the Harrison River on Oct. 12.” (Nov. 3, 2011)

Read full article: http://www.theprovince.com/news/Lethal+Atlantic+salmon+virus+found+four+Pacific+salmon+species/5652096/story.html?cid=megadrop_story

Share