alexandra morton

Fish Farm Expansion in BC

On Thursday, June 26, 2014, the Province of BC is holding an open-house at the Airport Inn in Port Hardy for public comment on the first two new salmon farms in what the industry hopes will be a large expansion.

This is one of the final steps the Province of BC needs to perform to issue two new salmon farms Licences of Occupation, basically a rental agreement to occupy the space over the seafloor at these two sites. The federal government licences the farms, the Province is the landlord.

The "client" listed on the provincial website is the Tlatlasikwala First Nation, but the name on the application map lists only "Marine Harvest".

The Tlatlasikwala First Nation has about 70 members and they see salmon farming as the way they want to return to their traditional territory at Hope Island.

I am certain they have no wish to harm wild salmon, but the reality is inescapable. As we know from my legal challenge, salmon farms in British Columbia are issued a licence from the federal government of Canada to transfer diseased fish in marine net pen sites. What kind of future does that offer? These farms will be in prime wild salmon habitat and so stand to infect millions of wild salmon.

This is a tragic situation because, while the Tlatlasikwala are trying to secure a future, it has to be recognized they are making a decision that will affect First Nations to the south and to the north.  As wild salmon press into the narrow Goletas Channel, their gills will come in contact with pathogens from these farms. As these salmon continue to the south they will enter rivers throughout Vancouver Island, the mainland and deep into the Fraser River.  These fish will arrive on spawning grounds protected by other First Nations and if the diseases are harmful to Pacific salmon the damage will be done. 

Wild salmon thread us together, any decision made along their path affects everyone who waits for them, is nourished by them, makes a living from them and depends on them for ceremony.

 

There is a facebook page where people are gathering to respectfully register how we feel about wild salmon being exposed to more salmon farms.  If this coast does not stand together, we will certainly fall together.  It is very difficult to speak against these applications, but I am adopted and named and I have been asked to continue my work wherever it takes me.  Atlantic salmon farms are dangerous to wild salmon, I know this from years of my own research and contact with people fighting this industry around the world. I know this to be true - Gwayum'dzi

 

Getting Nervous?

Following the recent hearing in Federal Court of my lawsuit over the transfer of fish carrying disease agents into to the Ocean, Marine Harvest was quoted in two European news articles, Undercurrent News and FIS. Their statements suggest that the science is settled with respect to PRV and the risk it poses to wild fish in the Pacific Ocean.  These statements are misleading and warrant a response.

June 9 2014, I took Canada and Marine Harvest to federal asking the court to decide if it is legal for Canada to give salmon farming companies the power to transfer diseased salmon into net pens in the ocean.  Canada appears to have given the companies this power through the transfer conditions in their federal aquaculture licences.  Although the case was about one licence given to one company, it appears that all federal licenses contain these transfer conditions.   The farm in question is on BC's wild salmon migration route – as are many other fish farms operating on the Pacific Coast.

Lawyers Margot Venton and Lara Tessaro with Ecojustice argued that: no, this is not consistent with the laws of Canada.  In particular the transfer conditions are contrary to s. 56 of the Fisheries Act General Regulations which requires DFO to make the decisions about each transfer of fish and that they may only be transferred if they are not carrying disease or disease agents that may be harmful to the conservation and protection of fish. This case is based on one particular March 2013 transfer of farmed Atlantic salmon infected with the piscine reovirus from a hatchery near Sayward, BC to a salmon farm on the migration route of the Fraser sockeye – but it could set a precedent for all salmon farms in BC. 

We await Court’s the decision.  This is a very important decision and could make all the difference to how much disease BC wild salmon are exposed to and ultimately their fate as feedlot environment viruses are known to be dangerously virulent.

Another viral Load?

 

 

I found the statements by Marine Harvest about me offensive, but they also deserve clarification.

Specifically Marine Harvest states they have provided “independent third party evidence that confirms”:

1.         Piscine reovirus is natural to BC and has always been here

2.         It is not associated with the salmon heart disease, HSMI

3.         That the disease HSMI has never been found in BC

Whoa cowboys slow that runaway pony down, aren't you are getting a little ahead of yourselves! 

If Marine Harvest wants us to believe these claims are true, show us the publish peer-reviewed scientific.  You can't just make it up as you go along, especially in light of the fact that what science does exist in the public domain comes to opposite conclusions; that the virus is new to BC, causes HSMI and the Province of BC fish farm vet is reporting the symptoms of HSMI in BC farmed salmon.

"This pattern of inflammation has also been described with Heart and Skeletal Muscle Inflammation [HSMI] in Atlantic salmon reared in Europe, but this disease has not been identified in BC salmon.” (Aug. 29, 2008 report to Mainstream, Cermaq, largely owned by the Norwegian government, by Provincial vet Dr. Gary Marty)."

Below is a chart comparing the farmed salmon heart damage found in BC vs the heart damage that is diagnostic of the disease HSMI in Norway.

References for chart:

Kongtorp et al 2004,

Finstad et al. 2012

Mikalsen et al. 2012

However, this issue is greater than one virus and one disease. It is dangerous to let any virus replicate in feedlots and then pour into the environment, because feedlots cause pathogens to become more lethal. Here is how:

a.         Feedlot crowding means that when one fish dies the virus has 599,999 others to infect and so it survives easily. In the wild, a virus that kills its host is cast adrift in a vast ocean as the healthy salmon keep traveling.

b.         In the wild, viruses benefit from keeping their host alive, but in feedlots there is no future. All the fish die in 18-24 months at harvest time.   So feedlot viruses are known to replicate as fast as possible, each replication carrying the risk of mutation.  Mutation is the wild card that brings us the superbugs.

c.          Lethal viruses don't spread easily in the wild, because weakened fish are taken out of circulation by predators.   Infected farmed salmon, however, die slowly, shedding more and more virus.  This means wild salmon passing salmon farms can get a heavy dose of disease. This is not part of their natural history. They are not equipped to survive this.

d.         With salmon farms in their habitat, none of the wild salmon’s natural anti-disease mechanisms work, the system is breached, broken. Disease rules.

 

 

In closing

If Marine Harvest wants to pay for research to fight a legal challenge they are free to do so.   But if they want any credibility they need to subject their theories to the scrutiny of the scientific community who are experts on this disease. 

I think the flurry of articles in European press reflects nervousness.  The salmon farming industry is fighting for its survival in BC. Most of the Atlantic salmon I have tested in BC from supermarkets are infected with piscine reovirus.  This is serious.

I am fighting for the survival of BC’s wild salmon.  If this virus and all the other pathogens in salmon farms weaken wild salmon they are becoming less resilient, more vulnerable and when times get tough, we will lose them.

I await Justice Rennie’s decision.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Marine Harvest's lawyers speak

June 12 was Marine Harvest’s lawyers turn to present their arguments to the court.  

Their first presentation to the judge was about piscine reovirus.  Piscine reovirus is important only because the test case that gave rise to this legal action was the transfer of infected juvenile Atlantic salmon from the Dalrymple hatchery in Sayward into a net pen salmon farm on the Fraser sockeye migration route off northern Vancouver Island.

Marine Harvest’s lawyer told the judge that piscine reovirus does not come from the salmon farm sites,  it comes from the wild salmon and does not kill salmon in BC.

Their lawyer went on to say Marine Harvest has disproven the link between piscine reovirus and the disease, HSMI (which Marine Harvest lists as the #2 killer of their fish worldwide in their 2012 Annual General Report).   

Marine Harvest said it is Dr. Gary Marty  “opinion” is that piscine reovirus is not a disease agent.

Dr. Marty is a pathologist hired by the province of BC.  He is not a licenced veterinarian in BC,  his “opinion” has not been published and contradicts research papers published by government, academic and company scientists in Norway.  This work is an outlier made public only in this courtroom. 

The study of piscine reovirus is only 4 years old, it is an emerging science.  Are we really going to allow it to multiple and mutate in salmon farms of 1,000,000 Atlantic salmon on the migration routes of wild salmon throughout the southern half of BC based on the opinion of a BC government pathologist?

Here is a short video Twyla Roscovich made when this case was filed a year ago. CLICK HERE

However, as I said piscine reovirus is not what this case is actually about.   It is about is the federal aquaculture licences granted to salmon farms operating in BC and specifically whether this licence needs to be rewritten to stop permitting the transfer of diseased salmon from hatcheries to salmon farms in the ocean.

The lawyers for the Minister of Fisheries and Marine Harvest both made a point to tell the judge that while some diseased fish can be transferred to net pens under the federal licence that fish showing signs of clinical disease could not.

Actually this was true for the 2012 Licence I brought to the attention of the courts, but the new licence issued this year… months after filing this legal challenge has been changed.

Here is the 2013 Licence – note the red text:

3. Transfer of Fish

3.1 The licence holder may transfer to this facility live Atlantic or Pacific salmonids from a facility possessing a valid aquaculture licence issued pursuant to section 3 of the Pacific Aquaculture Regulations between the Fish Health zones described in Appendix VI, provided transfers occur within the same salmonid transfer zone as outlined in Appendix II and provided:

(a) the species of live salmonid fish are the same as those listed on the face of this licence;

(b) the licence holder has obtained written and signed confirmation, executed by the source facility’s veterinarian or fish health staff, that, in their professional judgement:

(i) mortalities, excluding eggs, in any stock reared at the source facility have not exceeded 1% per day due to any infectious diseases, for any four consecutive day period during the rearing period;

(ii) the stock to be moved from the source facility shows no signs of clinical disease requiring treatment; and

(iii) no stock at the source facility is known to have had any diseases listed in Appendix IV; or

(iv) where conditions 3.1 (b)(i) and/or 3(b)(iii) cannot be met transfer may still occur if the facility veterinarian has conducted a risk assessment of facility fish health records, review of diagnostic reports, evaluation of stock compartmentalization, and related biosecurity measures and deemed the transfer to be low risk.

 

Here is the 2014 LICENCE

 

3. Transfer of Fish

3.1 The licence holder may transfer fish to this facility from another facility possessing a valid aquaculture licence issued pursuant to section 3 of the Pacific Aquaculture Regulations provided that the following conditions are met:

(a) the fish are live Atlantic or Pacific salmonids;

(b) the species of live salmonid fish are the same as those listed on the face of this licence;

(c) transfers occur within the same Salmonid Transfer Zone as described in Appendix II; and

(d) the licence holder has obtained written and signed confirmation, executed by the source facility’s veterinarian, fish health staff, or facility manager, that, in their professional judgement:

(i) mortalities, excluding eggs, in any stock reared at the source facility have not exceeded 1% per day due to any infectious diseases, for any four consecutive day period during the rearing period;

(ii) the stock to be moved from the source facility shows no signs of clinical disease; and

(iii) no stock at the source facility is known to have had any diseases listed in Appendix III.

.        3.2  Where any or all conditions set in paragraph 3.1 (d) (i), (ii), (iii) cannot be met, transfer may still occur if the facility’s veterinarian has conducted a risk assessment considering facility fish health records, diagnostic reports, an evaluation of stock compartmentalization and related biosecurity measures, and deemed the transfer to be low risk.

In 2013, only clauses i and ii could be overridden by the facility veterinarian. Today, in 2014 clauses i, ii and iii can be ignored. 

It was very hard to hear the lawyers tell the court that fish showing sign of clinical disease were not being transferred.

We have one more day of court, then the wait until the judge makes his decision.

I want to express my deepest thanks to my legal team from Ecojustice, an environmental non-profit law firm.  I am very lucky they took this case.  They poured time and effort into this, they are extremely well-prepared and more than held their own against the government and Marine Harvest lawyers (the biggest salmon farming company in the world).

 

Going to Court to Stop Spread of Disease

Is Canada's Aquaculture Licence Safe for Wild Salmon?

Canada would like us to believe the licence they grant to salmon farmers uses the best science and the most rigourous regulations to manage salmon farms.  But it is hard to see it that way when it appears their Federal Aquaculture Licence allows transfer of farm salmon that are carrying disease pathogens into net pens right on the migration routes of BC's wild salmon.  Hard to believe, I know.

The transfer conditions in the Federal Aquaculture Licences puts decisions about whether infected farm salmon smolts will go into net pens in wild salmon habitat in the hands of fish farm staff and fish farm's veterinarians.  Is this safe for wild salmon when these company employees simply do not have the same ability or responsibility to consider and conserve wild salmon as government?

If DFO acted consistently with its responsibility to conserve the wild salmon - a responsibility described by Justice Bruce Cohen as DFO's paramount responsibility - then DFO would evaluate each and every transfer of young farmed fish from hatcheries into open net pens.  The Minister would also look at a virus like piscine reovirus, reported to spread like "wildfire," infect red blood cells and damage salmon heart muscle and she would do everything in her power to contain it, prevent it from spreading through the North Pacific, at least until it impacts were well understood.  Instead, the Minister has handed away this important decision about what fish get put into a salmon in the ocean to the salmon farming companies themselves.

And so June 11-13 we ask the courts to decide: Does the Minister of Fisheries have the authority to give the power to transfer fish to fish farm companies?  Is the federal aquaculture licence inconsistent with federal fisheries law including section 56 of the Fishery (General) Regulations* and therefore contrary to law.

You are welcome to attend, see below.

 

 
 

I initiated this legal action over a year ago, after learning that Marine Harvest had transferred juvenile Atlantic salmon infected with piscine reovirus from its Dalrymple hatchery in Sayward to its net pen facility in Shelter Bay (see blog post).  Shelter Bay is located at the north end of the passage between Vancouver Island and mainland BC.  This means most wild salmon from southern BC will migrate past this farm.  There is no reason to believe this particular transfer was unique, it is simply one that I learned about.  This is a test case.  My lawyers are Margo Venton and Lara Tessaro of Ecojustice, a non-profit law firm.

 

 

A test case. The Transfer Condition is part of the standard form aquaculture licence condition template approved by DFO in November 2012.  These conditions are in all 123 federal aquaculture licences issued for 2013.   The decision from this legal challenge could affect all salmon farms in British Columbia.

Below is the exact text of the licence condition that is now before the Court. Note that the apparent restriction on the transfer of disease-carrying fish from freshwater hatcheries to marine net pen sites, can be over-ruled by the final condition 3.1 (iv). 

3. Transfer of Fish

3.1 The licence holder may transfer to this facility live Atlantic or Pacific salmonids from a facility possessing a valid aquaculture licence issued pursuant to section 3 of the Pacific Aquaculture Regulations between the Fish Health zones described in Appendix VI, provided transfers occur within the same salmonid transfer zone as outlined in Appendix II and provided:

(a) the species of live salmonid fish are the same as those listed on the face of this licence;

(b) the licence holder has obtained written and signed confirmation, executed by the source facility’s veterinarian or fish health staff, that, in their professional judgement:

(i) mortalities, excluding eggs, in any stock reared at the source facility have not exceeded 1% per day due to any infectious diseases, for any four consecutive day period during the rearing period;

(ii) the stock to be moved from the source facility shows no signs of clinical disease requiring treatment; and

(iii) no stock at the source facility is known to have had any diseases listed in Appendix IV; or

(iv) where conditions 3.1 (b)(i) and/or 3(b)(iii) cannot be met transfer may still occur if the facility veterinarian has conducted a risk assessment of facility fish health records, review of diagnostic reports, evaluation of stock compartmentalization, and related biosecurity measures and deemed the transfer to be low risk.

Clause (iv) puts the health of wild salmon outside the pens in the hands of the facility veterinarian, and appears to allow that vet to make the choice whether to put a fish with a disease as defined in Appendix IV into the ocean, see below.

 

These transfer conditions do not appear to require proof that the juvenile farm salmon have been tested for diseases or viruses before transfer. The licence does not explain "risk." Risk to shareholders, the other salmon in the pens or the wild salmon?

Money

By the time a farm-load of 600,000 to 1,000,000 Atlantic salmon is ready for transfer from a hatchery into marine net pens for grow out to harvest, the company has spent millions rearing them for a year in tanks on land. Each one has been injected with a vaccine to protect them from some diseases.  If they can't be transferred into the ocean pens because of disease all that money is lost, as well as, the profits from the harvest.

Salmon farms are private businesses.  Unfortunately they use public or common waters to flush all their waste and that means what goes on inside the pens has potential to affect the wild fish outside the pens.   The legal mandate of a private company is to put the needs of the shareholder to make money first.  This means the primary focus of the people working on the farm is the profitability of the farm itself.  The legal mandate of the Minister of Fisheries and Oceans includes conservation and management of the public fishery, including the protection of the marine environment on which the public fish depend.  So why has the Minister of Fisheries stepped back from this crucial decision?

Risk

Marine Harvest’s lawyers suggest the entire BC farmed salmon industry would be shut down if they could no longer use piscine reovirus infected fish.  Therefore, it is important to them that the court believes piscine reovirus does not cause disease.  Piscine reovirus is at the center of this test case, but the resulting decision will impact farm salmon infected with any virus or bacteria. 

Piscine reovirus appears to cause heart damage in farmed salmon in Norway.  Scientists warn a wild salmon infected with the virus might not be able to swim up a river, or even reach the river.  If piscine reovirus affects Pacific salmon this way, the risk to Canada is incalculable.  There is already evidence it is spreading in BC.  BC government pathologist, Dr. Gary Marty reported he could not detect piscine reovirus in young wild salmon in the Broughton Archipelago in 2008 (Saksida et al 2012), but it is common to find it there today (my work, ongoing).

 In Norway, non-government scientists have access to farmed salmon, but in Canada scientists who want to study farmed salmon have to buy them in the supermarket where the organs have been removed, so research is limited.  One of the very few labs with access to BC farmed salmon is the BC Ministry of Agriculture's Animal Health Centre in Abbottsford.  This lab has been responsible for the quarterly provincial farm salmon health audits that examine farmed salmon that have died.  The pathologist at the Animal Health Centre has reported diagnostic symptoms of the disease associated with piscine reovirus, called HSMI, but inexplicably they do not believe it is HSMI.  This does not make sense and deserves explanation. Download HSMI-type Lesion Reporting in BC

Cohen Commission

In his final report on the Inquiry into the Decline of the Sockeye Salmon in the Fraser River, Justice Bruce Cohen warned that the potential harm posed to Fraser River sockeye from salmon farm is serious or irreversible. He concluded that disease transfer occurs between wild and farmed fish, and he was satisfied that salmon farms along the sockeye migration routes have the potential to introduce exotic diseases and to exacerbate endemic diseases that could have a negative impact on Fraser River sockeye.

Further, he found that the risk of disease to wild fish has not been adequately studied.  This is painfully clear with piscine reovirus, a highly infectious virus, associated with devastating impact on salmon health.  No on knows what is happening to wild salmon that have been exposed to massive farm salmon populations infected with piscine reovirus.  Maybe it is killing them, maybe it makes them too slow to catch food, or escape from whales, maybe it is doing nothing.  "Maybe" is just not good enough when it comes to Canada's wild salmon.  They feed over 100 species, support coastal and interior economies, they feed the trees that make the oxygen we breathe and pull the carbon that is causing climate change out of our atmosphere.

Your Attendance

I am very grateful for my legal team, for their brilliance and hard work in preparation for this, their workload is enormous.  You can sit in on the proceedings June 11-13 in federal court, 701 W. Georgia St., Vancouver.  Please respect the court, do not use your phone, laptop or any electronic device while in the building, turn your phone "mute."  If you want to take notes use a pen and paper and if you want to post, tweet or email you can step outside.

I am hoping we can stop the spread of disease from farm salmon to protect the wild salmon of the Northeastern Pacific Ocean.

 

*Section 56 Fisheries Act:

 

Licence to Release or Transfer Fish

56. The Minister may issue a licence if

·       (a) the release or transfer of the fish would be in keeping with the proper management and control of fisheries;

·       (b) the fish do not have any disease or disease agent that may be harmful to the protection and conservation of fish; and

·       (c) the release or transfer of the fish will not have an adverse effect on the stock size of fish or the genetic characteristics of fish or fish stocks.