Tag Archives: Salmon

DFO Crime Scene – Alexandra Morton Event

Canada, Politics, Western Canada, , ,
Share

I am a biologist and resident of a tiny coastal community on the coast of British Columbia.

When salmon farms arrived I believed the government promotion that itwould be good for my community.

But now that the industry has surrounded us with 27 huge Norwegian
salmon feedlots, there are only 8 people left, the First Nations oppose the
industry, our school is closed, we have the sea lice epidemics, mounds of waste
only bacteria can grow on, toxic algae blooms and zero jobs in the industry. We
learned at the Cohen Inquiry that the federal government has offered to sell
this Norwegian industry to us, the people of Canada. My town was based on wild
salmon through fishing, tourism and the arts. As the wild salmon went so we
went. We did not accept the low paying jobs as reward for allowing this
industry to destroy our coast.

Video from recent Alexandra Morton event in Vancouver – story continues below

Salmon feedlots break the natural laws unleashing bacteria,
viruses and sea lice. My lawyer, Greg McDade, questioned Dr. Laura Richards,
Director General of Science Pacific Region about the 2009 sockeye crash at the
Cohen Inquiry. We learned a briefing note sent to the Minister of Fisheries
stated that a virus is one of the leading suspected causes of the 2009 sockeye
collapse.  We also learned DFO
muzzled their own scientist who made this discovery, Dr. Kristi Miller. Salmon
Leukemia virus is a retro virus like HIV. DFO never told the public and left us
to blame fishermen. They also refused to test the farm salmon in an
effort to find out where this virus is coming from.

Salmon farming has harmed wild salmon everywhere they
operate (Ford and Myers, 2008). Canada has already destroyed one earth’s
greatest natural food supplies, the North Atlantic cod, by muzzling their
scientists. Fisheries and Ocean Canada blindly adhered to bad policy kicking the
cod and the east coast economy over the cliff. Immediately after, the Hibernia
oils wells went onto the Grand Banks. Canada traded food security for oil, the
future for short-term gain for the corporate world. No one in DFO was held
accountable and there is every indication that they are doing this again in BC.

I am unwilling to accept our fate as victim of another bad,
misguided policy favouring industry over our communities.   As soon as oil prices rise too
far the Norwegian salmon feedlot industry will not be able to afford shipping
ground up fish from Chile to feed their Atlantic salmon here in the Pacific.
They will walk away and we will be sitting like fools with viral epidemics and
piles of manure smothering a once productive seafloor.

All too often people feel helpless. Democracy is slipping
away under the crush of the global economy.We need to wake up right now and step into the process of
how we form governments.Members
of Parliament are our agents, nothing more. Eighty-five percent of British Columbians consider
wild salmon an icon; they bring in over $2 billion a year in wilderness tourism
and fishing, they are an essential bloodstream carrying nutrients to our
forests, they are food security. We want them and our political agents have no
business hiding the truth about them from us.  It is time to elect people who will stand by us and defend
our rights and resources.

For these reasons I left home April 13th to go door-to-door
to as many federal candidate campaign offices as possible to get them on record:  Do you support wild salmon, would you
protect them by removing salmon feedlots from BC waters, would they protect the
aquaculture workers by supporting land-based aquaculture farming species that
are more sustainable, lower on the food chain than salmon?

I have been down Vancouver Island to Nanaimo, across the
ridings of Vancouver, through Chilliwack to Kamloops, Enderby, Salmon Arm,
Mission. I will be continuing through the lower mainland and southern Vancouver
Island.  It has been a fascinating
exploration. I am a biologist with very little political experience and I am on
a steep learning curve.

Here is what I have found out:

The Greens have
some candidates that are very impressive such as, Adriane Carr (Vancouver
Central) and Elizabeth May (Saanich – Gulf Islands). Sue Moen, (Vancouver
Island North) really tells it like she sees it, but is not electable.  Some Greens should get out of the way
as they are not serious about winning. Both Carr and May strongly support
wild salmon.They would transition
workers in the industry to land-based aquaculture. I think Carr and May
would go a long way to bring balance to any government. 

The Liberals
seemed uncertain of their position, with many candidates remaining silent, but
on April 18 Micheal Ignatieff said, “if fish farms are harming wild salmon
we’ve got to stop it, put it on land or stop it all together.” This is a much
stronger statement than the one made by Mike Holland (Vancouver Island-North)
who said, “We need to get the
science done to understand just what the relationship and impact is, and we
need to be prepared to go where the science takes us. If that takes us to
closed-containment only I support that, but I want the science first. I’m not
prepared to mandate a timeline at this stage.”I think Liberal Renee Heatherington (Saanich-Gulf
Islands)  may be pushing her party
to establish a policy on this.

The Conservatives
avoided me, until April 18 when MP Cathy MacLeod accepted our request to meet
in Kamloops.I was really looking
forward to hearing the Conservative position, but as we sat down she said she
could only listen and not give a position. Senator Nancy Greene joined us.I have met Nancy before and know she is
a strong wild salmon supporter.MacLeod’s attitude shifted during the meeting. I think she wanted to see
me as a nut, but as I outlined how the federal government has been hiding a
virus in the sockeye, I saw a change in her and she did say the Conservatives
are awaiting the Cohen decision. This is really not good enough.I have seen three major government
reviews on salmon farming entirely ignored by the provincial and federal
governments. The Cohen Inquiry is not a fish farm review, even if it finds
impact on the sockeye it is not mandated to do a thorough salmon farm
investigation.There is more than
enough evidence of harm to invoke the Precautionary Principle, which Canada
says it supports.

Conservative candidate John Duncan (Vancouver Island-North) told constituents in
Port McNeill that he supports continued salmon farming.At an All-Candidates meeting in Courtenay, Duncan’s seat was
empty – people call him “Mr. Invisible.”
Many of the Conservative offices are
very hard to find, and many people have told me the Conservatives do not attend the
All-Candidate meetings. Paul Forseth’s
(Burnaby–New Westminster) people didn’t want us to take pictures of their
office, saying it was private property. Colin Mayes’ campaign office address is
not on the internet – there is no website. His riding includes the Adams River,
one of earth’s biggest wild salmon runs. The people of Chilliwack-Fraser Canyon
are not pleased that Conservative MP Chuck Strahl just handed the candidacy to
his son Mark. The Conservatives get a thumbs down from me.

The NDP offices
are full of volunteers, people heading out the door with signs, tables of
coffee and snacks as no one has time to go home. Ronna-Rae Leonard (Vancouver
Island-North) is in full support of the people who make a living with wild
salmon, such as the wilderness tourism industry. But she says she is also
concerned with the people directly employed by the salmon farms. Thus she
supports building the infrastructure for a permanent land-based aquaculture
industry. Zeni Maartman (Nanaimo-Alberni) is a dynamo full of passion, energy
and deep commitment to both wild salmon and her riding.  Don Davies, Vancouver-Kingsway met with
us and is a man of action, compassion and understanding, in strong support of
wild salmon.  Fin Donnelly (New
Westminster-Coquitlam-Port Moody) joined me on the Paddle for Wild salmon
last fall, and is a hero to the wild salmon people province-wide. He tabled a
private member’s bill calling for removal of salmon farms onto land to protect
wild salmon and preserve jobs. Peter Julian (Burnaby-New Westminster) has
been involved with protecting wild salmon for a longtime.Denise Savoie (Victoria), Nathan Cullen
(Skeena-Bulkley Valley), and Jean Crowder (Nanaimo-Cowichan) have also supported wild salmon very
strongly through their careers. Cullen helped protect the North Coast from the
expansion of salmon feedlots into the mouth of the Skeena River. I am hoping the
NDP will become stronger in their platform to remove salmon farms from BC
waters.

Please follow what the politicians are saying at
VoteSalmon.ca

zzz

Share

Gasoline spill likely killed thousands of Goldstream River salmon

Energy and Resources, Oil&Gas,
Share

Fromt he Times-Colonist – April 17, 2011

by Kim Westad

Thousands of salmon are expected to have been killed by a large
gasoline spill that poured into Goldstream River during the weekend.

A Columbia Fuels truck smashed into the rock face and rolled, damaging the cab and one of the two tanks the engine was pulling.

About
40,000 litres of gasoline are estimated to have been spilled and much
of that flowed into the river at the side of the highway. The truck hit
the rock wall beside a small waterfall that flows across the road to the
river, and that helped move the gas.

“Gasoline is very toxic to aquatic life,” said Graham Knox, the Ministry of Environment’s manager of environmental emergencies.

Ministry
biologists, an oiled-wildlife specialist and staff from Environment
Canada were on the scene Sunday conducting an assessment of the site.
There was little apparent damage at the site itself, but as they moved
downstream toward the estuary, they saw “hundreds” of dead fish in the
water, Knox said.

With that many visible to the eye, the number killed will be significantly higher, he said — likely in the thousands.

“It is a significant amount of fish that have been killed,” he said.

Gasoline
travels and kills quickly in water. The fish would likely have died as
soon as the gasoline went into their gills, Knox said.

The
ministry tries to collect the dead fish, Knox said, so that other
animals don’t eat them and potentially ingest contaminants. It’s
unlikely the fish ingested the gas, he said, although that will be
reviewed.

Gasoline is more toxic to wildlife than other types of
oil, Knox said. The only positive is that being lighter, it evaporates
quickly and breaks up. Crude oil is more persistent and difficult to
cleanse from the environment.

Small excavators were on scene Sunday at the dump site, removing the roadside soil. It will be replaced.

The
Environmental Management Act specifies that the party at fault is
responsible for much of the remediation costs. Columbia Fuels has been
“very co-operative from the start” on that, Knox said.

“They are proceeding with all of our requests and getting the work done.”

Columbia
will hire an environmental consultant to conduct various tests of the
soil and submit a report to the Ministry of Environment, Knox said.

Read original article

Share

DFO Shilling for Salmon Farmers: Outrageous Briefing Note

Uncategorized,
Share

Over the years, starting in earnest with the Kemano Completion Project fight in 1993, I’ve been highly critical of the Department of Fisheries and Oceans (DFO) and its politicization by the Mulroney government of that day. I was hit with a massive lawsuit by former Minister Tom Siddon which my insurers stupidly settled (I made that comment publicly immediately upon the news release). I had support from many former DFO scientists and I’m satisfied that my statements were accurate. When the KCP was approved in 1986 this was because the politicians told DFO to do as it was told.

Now we have proof of DFO working on behalf of salmon farmers via a document filed at the Cohen Commission. To be truthful, it makes me feel ill to read it and report on it. The only conclusion one can come to is that the DFO is a willing arm of the fish farm Industry.

It’s styled as a “BRIEFING NOTE FOR THE DIRECTOR GENERAL OF HABITAT MANAGEMENT”

MEETING WITH BC SALMON FARMERS ASSOCIATION REGARDING PUBLIC CONFIDENCE AND AQUACULTURE.

The meeting was for May 4, 2005 with Mary Ellen Walling of the BC Salmon Farmers’ Association, David Rideout of the Canadian Aquaculture Industry Alliance, the Deputy Minister and other senior DFO staff and – get this – the primary purpose of the meeting was to discuss the challenges facing the BC salmon farming industry with respect to public confidence in aquaculture practices, as well as in the government regulation of the industry. (You will note that none of the independent scientists who had raised concerns about fish farming were to be present. No Alexandra Morton…no Martin Kroksek…no John Volpe…no Neil Frazer…no Daniel Pauly…and on the list of absentees goes).

It goes on to say, “As lead federal department for aquaculture, DFO has explicitly committed to improving public confidence in aquaculture. To deliver on this commitment, the department has undertaken several initiatives to raise public confidence in the context of aquaculture.” (my emphasis)

Can you believe this?

The document is a screed of helpful hints for the director as he marches hand in hand with the fish farmers to bury the truth, to be replaced with fish farmer propaganda including such gems as “developing a long term proactive strategy for raising pubic confidence in aquaculture…targeting information for the general public, rather than trying to directly challenge the media campaigns being carried out by well funded ENGOs.” It speaks of Regional Communications and Aquaculture Management Staff to “manage the file”.

Ponder that: a “Communications and Aquaculture Management staff”??? Would not “Fish Farmers’ Propaganda Department” be synonymous? This is our DFO taking care of the public interest?

The fish farmers have corrupted the DFO, which in turn was more than willing to be corrupted.

Here’s a little gem for you:

“Indications from pacific region are that the recent meeting with Mary Ellen Walling [flack for the fish farmers – eidtor’s note] was positive and industry seemed satisfied with the progress made at the meeting. The region committed to regular meetings with Mary Ellen Walling.” (emphasis mine)

Can you believe this! Industry seemed satisfied!

Thank God for that! One trembles to think of the consequences if good old Mary Ellen had been dissatisfied!

There is a link provided to this document and you can read it all for yourself.

I scarcely know where to start.

This is a huge vindication for people like Alexandra Morton who stood, unfunded, up to the bully. I can only imagine how she must feel seeing the despicable supposedly protector of our fish as corrupt as a Tammany Hall sort of City Hall. I don’t speak of monetary corruption. I’m reminded of the jingle:

“You cannot hope to bribe or twist,
(thank God!) the British journalist.
But, seeing what the man will do
Unbribed, there’s no occasion to.”

How the hell do these people sleep at night? What do they tell people what they do for a living? It surely would be easier in that regard to be the piano player in a house of ill repute.

Where have our politicians been? Where the hell has the mainstream media been? I’ve never been prouder of the fact that I was forced out because of my support for Alexandra Morton. To be in journalism and not report on this would be to accept dirty money.

Do not, for the love of God, let the provincial government off the hook. Until Ms. Morton’s lawsuit, the BC government was the leading shill.

The governments ought to be ashamed but so should backbenchers for not asking questions. There was no shortage of questions raised outside the house – they knew what I was saying all too well. Where the hell were they when to be a politician took a little guts?

The governmental process at both levels of senior government should hang their heads in shame and more fool us if we don’t throw them all out on their tender asses.

2005 DFO Briefing Note (PDF)

Damien Gillis’ Video From 2009 confronting DFO at Aquanor, the world’s largest fish farming trade show:

Share

Cohen Sockeye Inquiry: Unguarded note conveys Fisheries’ manager’s frustrations

Uncategorized, ,
Share

From The Globe & Mail – April 5, 2011

by Mark Hume

An unguarded note a Department of Fisheries and Oceans manager wrote
to himself has given a judicial inquiry a glimpse into the frustrations
and fears felt by frontline staff fighting to save salmon habitat in
British Columbia.

The brief, one-page document written by Jason
Hwang, a manager for DFO’s Habitat and Enhancement Branch in the
Kamloops area, was entered as evidence at the Cohen commission on
Tuesday by Judah Harrison, a lawyer representing a coalition of
conservation groups.

Mr. Harrison, who obtained the document through disclosure, described
it as “a sort of unguarded critique” of DFO’s struggles to protect
habitat.

“Well, I definitely agree it’s unguarded,” said Mr.
Hwang, who was one of three DFO witnesses testifying on habitat issues.
“I believe I wrote that for myself for some upcoming planning meeting. .
. .trying to reflect on some key things we were grappling with.”

Mr. Hwang said the note is a few years old, but in response to questions from Mr. Harrison, he agreed things haven’t changed.

“Huge
amount of development in Thompson, Okanagan, Nicola, Shuswap. We can’t
keep up. Referral backlog is up to 4 months,” wrote Mr. Hwang, whose
department is responsible for ensuring salmon habitat is not degraded by
logging, mining, agriculture, urban growth and other activities. “We
are not able to pursue smaller occurrences that in the past we have
pursued and prosecuted.”

Earlier in the week, the commission heard
that DFO is not meeting its key policy goal of ensuring that
developments do not cause a net loss of fish habitat. The commission,
which is examining the decline of sockeye salmon in the Fraser River,
also heard DFO’s effectiveness was hampered by a new habitat management
policy (known as the Environmental Process Modernization Plan, or EPMP),
which staff in B.C. resisted because it was “lowering the bar” on
environmental protection.

“EPMP and staff reductions have reduced
our ability to engage with proponents. . .we don’t have a handle on what
is actually going on,” Mr. Hwang stated in his note.

“We have no viable referral system. This is killing us,” he stated.

“We
are without question not attaining no net loss. . .Our staff are very
dis-illusioned [sic] that the department is not doing more to address
this.

“The relationship between province and DFO is in a state of
disfunction [sic]. We don’t coordinate on referrals in any consistent
way, and there is no guidance or leadership from Vancouver-Victoria on
this.”

Mr. Hwang also wrote DFO was not keeping up with the
increased logging authorized by the province in response to the mountain
pine-beetle epidemic, which has swept through much of the B.C.
Interior, killing huge stands of timber.

“We are totally
disengaged from operational forestry. Rates of cut have increased
massively in response to MPB. We don’t have a handle on what is going
on, and are not providing any meaningful guidance on what we would like
to see for fish,” wrote Mr. Hwang.

The frank assessment of DFO’s
failings contrasted with the more cautious evaluations given in direct
testimony by Mr. Hwang, and his co-witnesses, Patrice LeBlanc, director
of habitat policies for DFO in Ottawa, and Rebecca Reid, a regional
director in the Pacific.

They portrayed DFO as doing a good job despite the challenges of budget restrictions and staffing cuts.

Dr.
Craig Orr, who was observing proceedings as executive director of the
Watershed Watch Salmon Society, said he was dismayed by the testimony.

“The
evidence supports the widely held belief that government is more
concerned with streamlining harmful industrial development and
bolstering flagging public confidence than in protecting critical salmon
habitat,” he said.

Read original article

Share

Sockeye Virus Cover-up: DFO’s stifling of research a case of déjà vu

Uncategorized, ,
Share

From the Globe & Mail – March 27, 2011

by Mark Hume

When a federal commission investigating the collapse of Fraser River
sockeye stocks heard recently that a Fisheries and Oceans scientist who
has done groundbreaking research was being silenced, it gave Jeffrey
Hutchings a bad case of déjà vu.

“Your recent articles on DFO’s
muzzling of Dr. Kristi Miller remind me of similar attempts by DFO to
stifle the imparting of science from government scientists to other
scientists and to the Canadian public,” he wrote in an e-mail.

Prof. Hutchings, a widely respected fisheries scientist, holds the
Canada Research Chair in Marine Conservation & Biodiversity at
Dalhousie University, in Halifax. In 1997, he, Carl Walters from the
Fisheries Centre at the University of British Columbia and Richard
Haedrich, Department of Biology at Memorial University of Newfoundland,
set off a media firestorm with a paper that ripped DFO for suppressing
controversial science.

Writing in the Canadian Journal of
Fisheries and Aquatic Sciences, they outlined two cases – the collapse
of Atlantic cod stocks and the diversion of the Nechako River, in B.C. –
in which they maintained research was stifled because it didn’t conform
to political agendas.

They argued that, on the East Coast, DFO
silenced scientists who warned Atlantic cod stocks had been devastated
not by seal predation, but from overfishing. And, in the West, they
stated that DFO rejected research that showed an Alcan plan to divert
the Nechako River would damage Chinook stocks.

In both cases, they
wrote, hard-working scientists had their findings suppressed by DFO
managers who didn’t want to see research that clashed with political
goals.

“We contend that political and bureaucratic interference in
government fisheries science compromises the DFO’s efforts to sustain
fish stocks,” Mr. Hutchings and his colleagues wrote.

When the
article came out, it created headlines, sparking a national debate on
the role of science within government. DFO officials denied stifling any
researchers. But the article, quoting internal DFO memos, showed
scientists had been “explicitly ordered … not to discuss ‘politically
sensitive’ matters … with the public, irrespective of the scientific
basis.”

Earlier this month, the Cohen Commission of Inquiry Into
the Decline of Sockeye Salmon in the Fraser River, saw an e-mail by Dr.
Miller in which she complained about being kept away from a workshop
because her DFO masters “fear that we will not be able to control the
way the disease issue could be construed in the press.”

Dr.
Miller, who suspects a virus is killing millions of sockeye salmon in
the river, had a paper published in the prestigious journal Science
earlier this year. But she has not been allowed to talk to the press
about it.

“By preventing Dr. Miller from speaking to the media and
from participating in non-DFO controlled meetings/workshops, DFO is
inhibiting science,” Mr. Hutchings said in his e-mail. “This action, so
evidently lacking in openness and transparency, is regrettably
consistent with the objective of controlling the information that public
servants are permitted to disseminate to the public.”

Dr.
Miller’s situation also inspired Alan Sinclair, a retired DFO scientist,
to write: “Your recent article reporting that DFO put a gag order on
Dr. Kristi Miller’s research on disease in sockeye salmon is very
disturbing. Unfortunately, this sort of thing is all too common in DFO
and other Federal Ministries with large science components. I encourage
you to follow up on this and make Canadians more aware of what’s going
on.”

But following up while Dr. Miller is locked away from the
press won’t be easy. She isn’t due to testify before the Cohen
Commission for several months. Until then, Canadians can only wonder
what she discovered – and why she was silenced.

Read original article

Share

Fish farm sues activist Don Staniford for defamation

Uncategorized, ,
Share

From the Globe & Mail – March 24, 2011

by Mark Hume

A heated battle between an anti-fish farm group and the aquaculture
industry is headed to the Supreme Court of British Columbia over attack
ads that equate farmed salmon with cancer-causing tobacco.

Mainstream
Canada, the second-largest aquaculture company on the West Coast, is
seeking damages for “false and defamatory postings” and seeks to have
the offending material removed from the websites, Facebook accounts and
Twitter feeds of Don Staniford and his organization, the Global Alliance
Against Industrial Aquaculture.

Mainstream Canada announced the lawsuit in a press release on
Thursday, and Mr. Staniford responded by releasing a copy of a letter he
sent to Mainstream’s parent company in Norway, Cermaq ASA, in which he
says he welcomes the chance to debate the issue in court.

“GAAIA
takes Cermaq’s complaint extremely seriously and very much welcomes the
opportunity to expand upon why we honestly and firmly believe that
‘Salmon Farming Kills,’” states the letter, repeating one of the
anti-fish farm slogans to which Mainstream objects.

Laurie Jensen,
Mainstream Canada’s communications and corporate sustainability
manager, said the company is not concerned the lawsuit might give Mr.
Staniford and his campaign more publicity.

“It’s not about the
media,” she said. “It’s about the fact that these guys have crossed the
line. The comments there are so insane and libellous that we just can’t
not do anything any more.”

Ms. Jensen said the anti-fish farm
campaign has drawn complaints from the company’s employees, customers,
suppliers and from some first nations, which are partners in aquaculture
operations.

“They are saying somebody’s got to do something about
this – and if not us, then who?” she said. “So that’s what it’s about.
We can’t let this continue. Enough’s enough.”

Mr. Staniford said the lawsuit is an attempt by the company to silence its harshest critic.

“This
is an example of the Norwegian government trying to shut down free
speech,” he said, noting that the GAAIA website was taken offline after
the Internet service provider was advised of the lawsuit by the company.

Mr.
Staniford said he hopes to have a new site up soon, and that he will
use it to continue his battle against fish farms and to raise legal
defence funds.

Mr. Staniford, who is based in B.C., said he formed
GAAIA recently to go after fish farms internationally, and that the
organization “has supporters globally.”

Mainstream, which produces
25,000 tonnes of farmed fish annually in B.C., states in its claim that
Mr. Staniford and GAAIA defamed the company numerous times in a
campaign launched in January that ran in three segments, under the
titles “Salmon Farming Kills,” “Silent Spring of the Sea” and “Smoke on
the Water, Cancer on the Coast.”

The notice of claim lists more
than 30 slogans the company finds defamatory and says the anti-fish farm
campaign “employs graphic imagery that links the defamatory words and
Mainstream to tobacco manufacturers and cigarettes.”

It states
that tobacco products are known to be harmful to human health and
alleges the campaign clearly implies that Mainstream’s products “kill
people … make people sick … are unsafe for human consumption … [and
that] Mainstream is knowingly marketing a carcinogenic product that
causes illness, death and harm.”

The GAAIA campaign is aimed at
“Norwegian-owned” fish farms in general, but the claim notes that the
Norwegian government owns 43.5 per cent of Cermaq ASA, so the link to
Mainstream is obvious.

Read original article

Share

Researcher suggests ‘salmon leukemia’ is to blame for decline of Fraser sockeye

Uncategorized,
Share

From the Globe & Mail – March 20, 2011

by Mark Hume

Of all the theories heard so far by the Cohen Commission, the most
intriguing involves new research by a molecular scientist who is
pointing to the possibility of an epidemic of salmon leukemia.

Kristi
Miller hasn’t been called to testify on her research yet, but her work
is already causing a buzz at the inquiry, in part because it seems an
effort has been made to keep it under wraps.

Dr. Miller has not been available for media interviews, even though
she recently published a paper in the prestigious journal Science.
Usually, Fisheries and Oceans Canada promotes interviews when one of
their researchers gains an international profile for groundbreaking
work. But when Dr. Miller’s paper came out earlier this year, all
requests for interviews were denied.

She will be called before the
Cohen Commission, probably toward the end of the summer, when the
hearings begin digging into the possible role of disease in the decline
of sockeye salmon in the Fraser River.

Brian Wallace, senior
counsel for the commission, will likely probe the full extent of her
research at that time, but if he doesn’t, Gregory McDade, a lawyer
appearing at the hearings for a coalition of conservation groups,
certainly will.

Mr. McDade signalled his deep interest in Dr. Miller’s work recently in questioning two witnesses.

When
Laura Richards, Pacific regional director of science for DFO, testified
last week, he asked her about a series of e-mails that suggested Dr.
Miller was being muzzled.

In a Nov. 2009 e-mail to Mark Saunders,
manager of salmon and freshwater ecosystems division, Dr. Miller said
she was being kept away from a science forum.

“Laura [Richards]
does not want me to attend any of the sockeye salmon workshops that are
not run by DFO for fear that we will not be able to control the way the
disease issue could be construed in the press. I worry that this
approach of saying nothing will backfire,” she wrote. “Laura also
clearly does not want to indicate … that the disease research is of
strategic importance.”

Dr. Richards testified that Dr. Miller had somehow misinterpreted things, and that there was no intent to silence her.

Mr. McDade also asked Scott Hinch about Dr. Miller’s work.

Dr.
Hinch is principal investigator at the University of British Columbia’s
Pacific salmon ecology and conservation lab, is the architect of some
remarkable research into why so many sockeye die in the Fraser River
before spawning, and is a co-author with Dr. Miller on the Science
article.

Dr. Hinch testified that some years more than 70 per cent of the sockeye die in the river, en route to the spawning grounds.

“And
that would make this problem the single greatest problem in terms of
loss of salmon of any that you’re aware of,” said Mr. McDade.

“Oh, yes,” answered Dr. Hinch.

“So we could be looking at losses of over three million fish in some years?” asked Mr. McDade.

“Yes,” replied Dr. Hinch.

Mr.
McDade then quoted the Science article, which hypothesizes the mass
mortality of salmon in the Fraser “is in response to a virus” that
infects fish before river entry.

“You agree with that statement?” he asked.

“Yes,” said Dr. Hinch.

“So
this purported virus, if it in fact exists, goes a very substantial way
towards … explaining the whole of the en-route loss?” he was asked.

“It could. And that’s why it got published in the journal Science,” replied Dr. Hinch.

“So
the Miller paper has hypothesized a purported virus but hasn’t named
it. … But in your discussions, you’ve talked about salmon leukemia as a
possible name for that?” said Mr. McDade.

“That was Kristina Miller’s offering, yes,” said Dr. Hinch.

“And have you heard that referred to by fish farmers as fish AIDS?”

“ I haven’t heard of that, no,” said Dr. Hinch.

“ But as a form of immune suppression?” asked Mr. McDade.

“Yes.”

Dr.
Miller won’t testify for months yet and she remains banned from giving
any media interviews. But her research, which could explain why up to
three million salmon a year are dying in the Fraser, is already
reverberating at the Cohen Commission.

Read original article

Share

Cohen Commission: Study Rules Out Usual Freshwater Habitat Suspects in Sockeye Decline

Uncategorized, ,
Share

From the Globe & Mail – March 11, 2011

by Mark Hume

A federal judicial inquiry that is trying to find out why sockeye
salmon in the Fraser River are in decline has been told that whatever is
killing them, it is not one of the usual suspects.

While mining,
logging, hydro projects and other industrial developments in the
watershed are degrading habitat quality, none of them can be blamed for
the precipitous drop in sockeye stocks, states a science report done for
the Cohen Commission of Inquiry Into the Decline of Sockeye Salmon.

Marc Nelitz, lead author of a study that looked at the impact of a
variety of human activities, said while the number of adult sockeye has
dropped dramatically over two decades, the survival of juvenile salmon
has remained stable.

“The collection of all that evidence leads us
to conclude it’s unlikely the freshwater environment is playing a
role,” Mr. Nelitz said Thursday, testifying to the Cohen commission.

The
report did not reach a definitive conclusion, but Mr. Nelitz said “the
weight of evidence” clearly indicates whatever is killing the fish is
doing so outside the Fraser environment.

“Based on the evidence it
seems most likely that changes in the physical and biological
conditions in the Strait of Georgia have led to an increase in mortality
during marine life stages,” the report states. “Specific mortality
agents include lack of food, freshwater and marine pathogens, harmful
algal blooms and other factors.”

The report did say it is possible
“a non-lethal stressor in the freshwater environment is causing
mortality during a later life stage,” but if so, it wasn’t identified.

Mr.
Nelitz, a systems ecologist with the environmental consulting firm ESSA
Technologies, said the research team looked at the impact of forest
harvesting activities, the effect of a massive pine beetle infestation
that has altered hydrology by killing off vast tracts of forest, the
storage of log booms in the estuary, large- and small-scale hydro
projects, urbanization, agricultural development and water use.

It
has long been known those activities degrade fish habitat to varying
degrees – but the relatively steady survival rate of young salmon in the
Fraser eliminates them all as suspects in the mystery the Cohen
commission is trying to unravel.

Bruce Cohen, a British Columbia
Supreme Court justice, was appointed by Prime Minister Stephen Harper
after only about one million sockeye returned to the Fraser in 2009,
when more than 10 million fish had been expected. That marked the low
point in 20 years of decline, although there was a dramatic and
unexpected rebound last year, when more than 28 million sockeye
returned, providing the biggest run since 1913.

The Cohen
commission, which has ordered a dozen scientific reports and is holding
evidentiary hearings in Vancouver, is trying to figure out why sockeye
stocks are so unstable, and why they have been declining for so long.

Mr.
Nelitz said the study did not look at the cumulative impact of
activities along the Fraser, nor did it examine saltwater habitat. Those
issues are under separate study.

The report said more information
is needed on the early life stages of salmon, and it called for better
estimates of juvenile abundance, for more information on the survival
rates of young salmon over winter, and for studies on the period when
smolts migrate down the Fraser and go out to sea.

Read original article

Share

Critics question Fraser River gravel plan

Mining,
Share

From the Chilliwack Progress – March 7, 2011

By Robert Freeman

Gravel removal from the Fraser River is back in the news.

After a period of relative quiet, cancellation of a
gravel removal operation at Tranmer Bar near Chilliwack renewed the
charge by critics that gravel mining in the river is driven by
commercial interests rather than flood protection.

John Werring, a member of the Fraser River Stewardship
Gravel Committee, said he was told by B.C. government officials that the
Tranmer Bar operation was cancelled because no buyer for the gravel
could be found.

“How is it that a provincial government, with all its
resources … is not able to pull together the resources to take care of
that emergency,” said.

“If this is an emergency … call in the army,” he said.

But a spokesman at Emergency Management B.C. said the
reason for the cancellation was a request by federal fisheries for
“additional information,” which pushed the project beyond the “window”
for in-river work.

Without a completed permit, not even the government,
could go ahead and remove the gravel despite market conditions, the
spokesman told The Progress on a background basis.

Chilliwack MLA John Les, who has long pushed for gravel
removal to reduce the risk of flooding, lambasted critics for telling
the public that the government aims to prevent flooding by mining gravel
from one specific site.

He said the idea is to remove gravel from many sites
around the river reach from Hope to Abbotsford to “unplug” the river and
lower water levels.

“Many children understand, if you let (gravel build-up)
to continue, it will plug up the river … and one of these years the
inevitable will happen,” he said.

Les said the Tranmer Bar permit was completed “far too late” to allow the mining to proceed.

He said the bar has been mined before, “but this year, for whatever reason, the permit wasn’t completed by Jan. 22.”

“Everyone is concerned about the fish,” he added, but
despite several years of gravel removal operations in the Fraser, record
returns are being reported.

Werring said the Tranmer Bar is “unique habitat” for
sockeye salmon and other fish species not found in other parts of the
river. It may also be habitat for sturgeon, he said.

If the Fraser River floods next year because gravel was
not removed at Tranmer Bar this year, he said the B.C. government is
going to find itself in an embarrassing position with the “lame excuse”
that no gravel was removed because no contractor could be found.

He said he hoped the real reason for the cancellation
was the influence of the stewardship committee and others on government
officials, and will eventually lead to a long-term, multi-year plan,
agreed upon by everyone.

“We’re not opposed to gravel removal from the Fraser River, if it’s necessary for flood protection,” he said.

Meanwhile, a letter of agreement between federal
fisheries and the B.C. government on gravel removal operations expired
in March, 2009. A one-year extension was approved to March, 2010.

But no B.C. officials were available last week to explain the delay in reaching a new agreement.

Read original article

Share

B.C. salmon farmers start to fight their bad rep

Uncategorized
Share

From the National Post – March 3, 2011

by Hollie Shaw

Campaigning for a less-than-popular cause has always been a challenge — many times a welcome one — for advertisers.

They
can choose to ignore the negative rap completely (Cigarettes may kill
you … But look at these pictures of happy, slim models!) or divert
attention from what primarily bothers people about the product or
practice in question (Animals were slaughtered to make these garments
…But fur is biodegradable, and supports Canadian jobs!)

A new
campaign from DDB Canada’s Vancouver office is attempting to highlight
one of the more contentious topics in British Columbia, the farming of
Atlantic Salmon in the western-most province, a practice long decried by
environmentalists.

After years of silence on the issue, the B.C.
Salmon Farmers Association (BCSFA) says the entire industry — the
province’s largest agricultural export, with sales of $450-million
annually — needs to dispel a longstanding counter-campaign that it says
is frequently rife with myth and misinformation.

The opposing side
has had a significant head start, such as the decade-long “Farmed and
Dangerous,” campaign, a program from the Coastal Alliance for
Aquaculture Reform, a coalition of environmental groups in B.C. The
industry is 30 years old, so why is it speaking up now?

“The
companies were very focused on the fish and really didn’t pay a lot of
attention to questions that were being asked my members of the community
and some of the environmental groups here who have a focus on marine
conversation,” says Mary Ellen Walling, the BCSFA’s executive director.
“When they kind of lifted their heads up, there was quite a lot of
information out there that was dated, about practices that were in place
in the early days of the industry [but] that were not sustainable, and
rumours including that farmed fish got their colour form artificial
dyes.”

Setting aside the obvious conundrum of where the truth
lies, from a marketing perspective such campaigns can be very difficult
to mount.

“It is hard, quite challenging,” said Ms. Walling. The
campaign also comes in spite of rising sales. Half the supply of salmon
around the world is now farmed, and that number is expected to increase
with emerging markets developing such as China, whose growing middle
class is keen to consume more fish. The campaign aims to dispel the deep
stigma that exists, particularly in British Columbia, about the farmed
fish.

“Restaurants are concerned about offering farmed salmon on
the menu for fear that they will be picketed,” Ms. Walling said. “It’s
important to get the support of the general public.”

The public is
being targeted first through TV ads that show gullible people believing
everything they are told. One execution shows co-workers easily falling
for an obvious Internet fraud, while another shows a teen whose parents
discover the gory aftermath of a giant house party and throw their cat
out of the house when their son blames the mess on the hapless animal.
The tag line is “Imagine if we believed everything we heard.”

The
ads direct people to a website, www.bcsalmonfacts.ca, which lists a
number of common and lesser known industry “myths” and counters them
with “facts.” It also has an open forum for discussion from both sides
that is hosting an ongoing and lively debate.

According to Lance
Saunders, executive vice-president and managing director at DDB Canada,
many of the popular misperceptions about farmed salmon were shared by
his co-workers at the agency, who found that their concerns were
dispelled after they took tours of fish farms around the province and
learned about industry practices.

“They came back really energized
and positive and thought salmon farmers had a really interesting story
to tell and that it deserved to be heard.”

He conceded it can present a creative challenge to face off against a sustained opposition that is often dramatic and emotional.

“People
are so passionate about the topic,” he said. “We had a more calming
strategy. It serves no purpose to fan the fires with having the same
type of aggressive response. We took the high ground, to some extent,
and I think that won people over — it was more about transparency, I
guess, than being about who was right or wrong.”

The social media
elements included three weeks of 24-hour a day website monitoring that
responded to all posts on the main site and the Facebook page and
reposted anything positive or negative about the campaign that had been
put up on external websites or blogs.

While it is still too early
to gauge the public’s reaction to the campaign, Mr. Saunders said, a
larger study in April will measure any change in public sentiment.
Anecdotally, he said, people are interested in finding out more
information about farmed salmon and are more keen to learn and talk
about the topic than they have been in the past.

Ms. Walling believes attitudes can change slowly with tenacious education rather than outright persuasion.

“[The
association] does farm tours on a water taxi and tours of processing
plants and we have done food shows in B.C. for the past six years. When
we started doing the shows, there were arguments from many people [who
were] coming to the booth. Now there are lineups of people to buy farmed
salmon at the booth. It’s changing, but [until now] the message has
only hit a segment of the population.”

Read original article

Share