In the next few weeks Rebecca Reid, DFO’s Regional Director, Pacific Region, has to decide whether or not to screen farm salmon for the infectious virus – PRV and keep the infected fish out of the ocean. DFO has face this decision twice before and refused to do anything. As a result, PRV from the Atlantic is spreading in the Pacific.
In early August DFO asked me to join their Fish Health Committee and their Indigenous and Multi-stakeholder Advisory Body. As well, DFO had to consult with me, as a result my lawsuit against them, and I am an expert witness for the ‘Namgis. As such, over the past few weeks I have met and talked at length with senior DFO Aquaculture and Science staff about the threat of PRV in salmon farms to wild salmon.
Through the Freedom of Information Act, I have obtained and read hundreds of internal emails written by these DFO staff members as they discussed what to do about PRV. So I went into these meetings knowing their positions. Meeting them in person was highly informative.
DFO Science and Aquaculture staff were united in defense of the opinion that PRV-infected farm salmon are not threat to wild salmon. However, they were unable to defend their position to those of us researching this pathogen. They would not bring their scientists to speak to us, which was disappointing as so much effort was made to bring non-government scientists to the table. I am enormously grateful to ‘Namgis for bringing so many scientists from across Canada together.
Taking a step back and looking first at what is known about this virus in the aquaculture regions of the world, DFO refuses to acknowledge the international published scientific reporting that PRV causes a disease called HSMI. Therefore, they can refuse to acknowledge that this disease has been diagnosed in BC salmon farms. By taking the inflexible position to reject all science describing impact of PRV, no progress to limit the impact of this virus is possible.
DFO also refuses to accept the evidence that PRV came from the Atlantic. When all the known PRV genetic sequences are sorted by how similar they are, the evidence that the virus spread to BC from the Atlantic is the strongest. DFO refuses to see this and insist there is a BC strain. However, unlike all the other virologists talking the PRV family tree, DFO cannot defend it’s position with a single genetic sequence. They have no proof of a strain of PRV in the Pacific before the 30 million Atlantic salmon eggs were imported by the salmon farming industry.
They refused to admit that allowing viruses to rapidly amplify, mutate and swap genetic material in feedlot-type environments is a known danger. The major diseases plaguing humanity came from farm animals, because farming prevents nature from extinguishing virulent pathogens through relentless culling of disease-weaken individuals with predators.
DFO Science refuses to acknowledge that the heart lesions caused by PRV in DFO labs are harmful to Fraser sockeye. These fish have to be supreme athletes to swim up the Fraser, now more than ever. What human athlete would volunteer for exposure to a virus that causes heart lesions?
While DFO kept repeating that PRV does not cause disease in BC farms, despite published evidence that it does, it became clear that the DFO farm salmon health audits are so poorly designed that they cannot detect chronic diseases like HSMI. 1.) It is policy to never visit farms during a disease outbreak, 2.) when they do visit a farm they only examine 5-10 dead salmon, ignoring the evidence of hundreds of salmon that are too weak to swim. This is what HSMI fish look like and yet DFO refuses to check them for HSMI. They just repeat that HSMI does not occur in BC farms.
This is not reasonable.
One of the scientists presenting for the ‘Namgis reported that the same farm fish that were diagnosed with HSMI in his lab, with confirmation by international veterinarians experienced with HSMI, were not diagnosed by the Provincial Ministry of Agriculture lab that DFO still depends. They reported the fish were suffering from “environmental” factors. Is this how DFO is able to keep repeating there is no HSMI in BC? The lab they use doesn't recognize it? Is it time for DFO, the federal agency tasked to keep wild salmon healthy got it's own lab for this work?
When one of the virologists working on PRV asked the simple question why does DFO use a different test for HSMI than the rest of the world, the senior Aquaculture and Science managers sat silently. They couldn’t or wouldn’t say why they use a test that doesn't diagnose the disease.
Coincidentally, MOWI told the court that so many of their fish are PRV-infected that they would be “severely impacted” if DFO prohibited them from transferring these fish into their marine farms. Transferring fish infected with an agent that causes disease is against the law in Canada. If DFO can't find the disease, the virus becomes legal.
DFO is allowing MOWI to continue putting PRV-infected fish into the migration routes of BC wild salmon, even though their own research has shown the virus is causing heart lesions in Fraser River sockeye, because they don't recognize these lesions as a disease.
Watching the DFO staff struggle to maintain their position was painful. They were asked what their silence meant, was it agreement or disagreement? How would they communicate their inability to answer questions to those above them who were not in the room? They weren't sure. We don’t have much time left to reverse the extinction trend of Pacific wild salmon. While DFO admits to impact of climate change they won’t admit that this means only the strongest have a chance to survive. Climate breakdown is going to hit weakened fish hardest. If Fraser sockeye are threatened with heart damage as they pass salmon farms, removing the virus causing the damage would give the fish a better chance of surviving.
From the 1,000s of internal DFO emails that I have viewed, I can see that when we got a change of government, the senior DFO staff working with the salmon farming industry remained in place. Their email discussions make it clear they are holding the hands of the fish farm companies, protecting them from the rules and nurturing an industry that is operating outside the laws of Canada. For example, private fisheries are not allowed in Canadian waters, but these salmon farmers are getting away with acting as if the fish in the pens belong to them. If I took a dead farm salmon, I would be charged with stealing, even if I had a valid fishing licence and they don't own the fish because that is against the law in Canada.
When salmon farmers fail to meet the lice limits and their lice eat populations of wild salmon to death – there are no fines. DFO staff fine fishermen all the time, but they are not allowed to fine salmon farmers for infractions. It is no wonder the industry lets their lice get out of control and destroy wild salmon. There are no consequences. Salmon farmers are the biggest herring fishery on this coast and yet they have no quota even as herring populations decline in many areas. Somehow their fish packers are the only ones exempt from displaying a licence number. Is this because licencing farm fish packers would reveal that they don’t own the fish? This was already decided in BC Supreme Court in 2009. They don’t own the fish in their pens as this is against the law.
The Aquaculture Management Division has grown into a big faction within DFO. There are a lot of managers and staff. My concern is that what is good for MOWI is probably good for them too. If MOWI was prohibited from transferring PRV-infected fish into their farms, what would happen to the Aquaculture Division of DFO? Would it shrink as farms had to close for lack of clean fish? This is what happened in Washington State. The state said no more PRV-infected fish, and the fish farmers can’t find any fish to put in their pens. Would DFO Aquaculture have to take a backseat to wild salmon?
What was most troubling was that the representatives of DFO Science refused to answer the most basic questions such as why does DFO use a different diagnostic for HSMI than the rest of the world? And does DFO acknowledge that HSMI occurs in BC?
All DFO staff at these meetings were united in support of the policy that PRV is harmless despite the evidence. In 2011, their own scientist found PRV is harming Chinook salmon. This finding was suppressed for 6 years and when it was finally published - DFO ignored it. Bad fit for policy – reject. Now the same DFO is tasked with the decision whether to ignore the policy they have defended for so long and respond to the growing mountain of evidence.
When Stephen Harper lost the election, we heard that muzzling of scientists would end. That was positive, but did anyone go further? Maybe look under the hood to see if there needed to be any adjustments in DFO? Scientists are talking, but I don’t see DFO listening. Were those who suppressed the growing evidence that PRV is a serious threat to wild salmon moved to a position where they can do less harm?
Why wasn’t DFO’s Wild Salmon Management staff – whoever they are – at these meetings on the impact of PRV on wild salmon? Do they exist?
What chilled me to the bone was when Dr. Rick Routledge asked the DFO staff if the imminent extinction of many BC wild salmon runs would be considered in this decision-making process and DFO said nothing.
Who among the staff present is going to convey what we learned at these meetings to the decision maker, Rebecca Reid, Director General Pacific Region? Presuming that she wants to adhere to the Precautionary Principle, which her Minister seems dedicated to, can we trust the DFO Aquaculture and Science staff present to relay their complete failure to address any of our concerns? That their science collapsed for lack of substance, failure to embrace the weight of evidence, refusal to acknowledge the work of other scientists and even their refusal to note that the science they were using still said PRV is causing heart lesions in Fraser River sockeye. When I asked – are you are ok with damaging the hearts of sockeye salmon before they face the Fraser River – they seemed to indicate they were. Heart lesions, no problem. If we asked the sockeye, is that what they would say? Because we can ask them, the science to do this exists. The problem is that it is in DFO, with the lid down and people sitting on it.
DFO’s science is not only weak, it happens to perfectly align with the needs of three multinational companies. They saw what happened in Washington State. No PRV, no can farm. Does it concern anyone that the Canadian Pension Plan is the 7th largest MOWI shareholder? How much support does Canada have to show these Norwegian companies and why?
How will the substance of these meetings be communicated to the Director General and the Minister?
Is the group that suppressed the finding that PRV harms Pacific salmon, now going to provide advice that PRV is is harming wild salmon?
I understand it is hard to switch tracks, to taking a clear-eyed view of what is going on here. I think some in DFO should be offered the opportunity to move on if this makes them uncomfortable, maybe to work directly for the industry. Unfortunately this behaviour has not only escorted wild salmon to the point of extinction, it has destroyed the aquaculture industry. They have zero social licence and First Nations who place a priority on wild salmon and culture are chasing them out of their territories.
The industry needs a hardline that they can meet or not and simply leave the region. If there is any chance that aquaculture can develop into a blue ribbon industry, they need government managers who will stand up to them, make them clean up, get out of this mess, obey the laws, respect indigenous governments and get creative in wholesome directions.
I am trying to be kind here by not naming all of you who sat across from me in these meetings and, in my view, put everything I love about this coast at extreme risk. We could double down and re-chart your course based on truth and the remarkable science buried in DFO that every country would want to copy. We could let salmon guide us in what they need from us to give them a fighting chance to survive. We could link arms with nations like ‘Namgis who are doing everything they can to save salmon. Pry off the lid and open the doors to your labs so that people concerned about why salmon are dying could benefit from the research we are paying for. As it stands, I feel that you have become one of the biggest threats to wild salmon in BC and instead of fighting us as time is running out, we could all move in the same direction. Let salmon talk to us by reading the messages encoded in their immune systems and help aquaculture rebuild completely out of contact with the powerful natural system that gives life to all of us.
If the decision by DFO in response to the lawsuits is to honour section 56 (b) of the Fishery General Regulations and prohibit transfer of farm salmon infected with PRV into marine farms this will be a huge shock to the salmon farming industry in BC. I understand that governments try not to do that to industry with good reason. However, this industry has been warned since 2008 that HSMI is occurring in the fish in their farms and they chose not to admit to it. Some in the industry have known since 2011 that the PRV in fish farms is harming Chinook salmon, but then some of the companies went to court to fight me and 'Namgis so they could keep putting the virus in the ocean. They knew PRV is infecting wild salmon since 2017. They might even know what the Norwegian virologist had to say in 2016 about the virulence of PRV found in BC. An environmental coalition tried to make it easy for them to transition slowly out of the ocean, but they turned their back on the offer. They have had 20 years to clean up and have refused to do so and now there are so few salmon left, there is no time to make this easy for them.
If the DFO staff facing this decision can’t take the heat, my only suggestion is get out of the kitchen and make room for people who can.