Feedlots Promote Disease Outbreaks

Enough shades of gray give you black, and next to black is white. This is the simple fact of feedlot biology, whether it be fishfarms or thousands of cattle, pigs or sheep crammed together for human consumption.

Everyone in the 'farming' industry knows this. Thousands of animals living cheek by jowl are a bubbling pot of potential disease outbreak. That's why thousands of pounds of antibiotics are used in ALL feedlots. But as we try and suppress a virus, they mutate. As they always have. And always will. In the end, we can't beat mother nature.

Viruses in the wild can race through a population and then it will be extinguished. This is how all species have adapted to survive viral outbreaks. But man-made feedlots artificially accelerate this cycle. And in the end, our meddling with nature can have catastrophic results for BC's wild salmon.

Great coverage as always.

Yeah right "might".

When those with a pecuniary interests in creating a shade of grey advance this kind of idea with "..and some of those fish might be outside the pen and some of those fish might be inside the pen..." it becomes a bit of joke. As Jeffrey J. points out, if you cram a species into a confined space it spreads disease. Blame the wild salmon which have existed in healthy numbers on our coast for centuries? That is rich even for the salmon farmers.

Salmon infections

The origin of the virus is irrelevant because its the nature of the feedlot that any virus regardless of origin will concentrate and probably mutate. If the virus came from the wild stocks then its just one more reason that these operations should not be located in open water, and should be relocated to land-based facilities.

But the industry has been fighting this for years, always with financial reasons why it is not feasible. At what point do the costs of medication, deaths to product, and total loss of production reach the point where it becomes cheaper to move to land?

I think the industry's hope is to put an end to the existence of wild stocks, thus clearing the ocean for their exclusive use, and removing any competition.

Back in the 1930's the

Back in the 1930's the Federal Government tried their damnist to transplant Atlantic salmon to the west coast. They never 'took', and the experiment was a flop. The question has got to be asked why in hell's sake would we want to try and transplant a foreign species when we have an abundment and a varity of native species here? The Atlantic salmon is the same species in the east side of North America and the western side of Europe/Scandinavia. What drives the salmon farming industry/Government into trying to transplant a foreign salmon species here?

A number of years ago I asked

A number of years ago I asked a spokeperson for the farm fish industry why we don't use coho and promote 'farm ranching'; for a reply all I got was a blank look.

Feedlots and virus mutation

There seem to be a few armchair virologists here.

Can any of them explain how exactly a virus in a farm inevitably mutates into a form which kills all the hosts?

I cannot find any scientific evidence to support this. All I can find suggests that viruses are more dangerous on a farm because the animals are closer together, increasing the risk of animals getting sick, just like people living in close proximity cities are at higher risk of getting sick from shared viruses than people living in relative isolation in the country.

The risk is from close proximity, not from mutating viruses. Again, if anyone can provide scientific evidence showing the truth of the "mutation in farms" claim I'd love to see it.

And if wild fish naturally carry a virus, and are naturally resistant to it, how exactly are farmed salmon with the same virus a threat to them? If I am highly resistant to H1N1, and I walk through a hospital waiting room full of people sick with H1N1, is the virus in the waiting room going to mutate and kill me? Of course not.

Yes, viruses mutate all the time, in dense situations and in sparsely populated situations. But the ones which mutate to kill their hosts don't stay around very long. The most successful viruses are benign and live off their hosts without doing any harm. That applies to almost all viruses on this earth. It's a rare few that mutate to cause harm.

I think all the outrage over "farmed salmon viruses" is misplaced and is not based on science.

Also for the record, from what I know, antibiotic usage on salmon farms is very low, and has declined from 456 grams of antibiotic per metric tonne of salmon produced in 1995 to 71 grams in 2008, and has declined even further since 2008. This information is all publicly available: http://www.al.gov.bc.ca/ahc/fish_health/Antibiotic_Graphs_1995-2008.pdf

I know, I know, facts are frustrating...

A lot of "mutation" talk here. Scary stuff! Yes, there are viruses everywhere and yes, mass food production can amplify this, but this doesn't mean there is disease and it doesn't mean we stop producing food for a growing population (especially efficient growing foods such as fish).

The fact is: farm-raised salmon receive vaccines to combat disease, are rarely requiring medicines, and are stocked at very low densities (they have to be, because fish need oxygen and the ocean only has so much). While some only prophesize doom & gloom (ie "probably mutate"), others continue down a path of continued improvement.

By the way, "land based salmon" would still be prone to viruses and being as land based farm grow salmon at 4-5 times the densities of ocean farms (they have to, to make money), it may increase the risk of "mutations gone wild".

Yes Van Isle, they call it Salmon Ranching

Hey Van Isle, interesting that you mention salmon ranching. Did you know that the IHN virus was first discovered in Alaska's salmon hatcheries back a few decades ago? Yeah, the same IHN that is the main focus of this story.

Thanks for letting everyone know more about the IHN virus.

why i would

Not eat a farmed raised Atantic Salmon if it was the last fish on earth.When im at CostCo and see people buying it i tell them about it and most people put it back

Do you warn them about the farmed chicken too?

Roady, do you try and scare people about farmed chicken and beef and lamb and turkey as well?

Farmed fish is going to happen, whether you like it or not. Scaring people about food is a waste of time, especially when the majority of science out there shows that farming fish is a good thing to do. Instead of harassing shoppers at the grocery store maybe you should research your claims a bit more, and find some way to direct your passion to constructively help fish farmers do better.

anyone working on

tissue culture salmon? The offspring of a petri dish ought to be good enough for any who would put farmed salmon in their mouths.

When ya got nuttin'

When you can't support your feelings with fact, then resort to talking amongst yourselves with "mutations" and "petri dish offspring" and "pecuniary interests" and "blah blah blah".

News flash kids - you're looking more and more isolated every day. You're chicken little persona just ain't working anymore.

Now, if you want to debate facts, then let's go for it. But how can I help you understand that "petri dish" talk ain't advancing your agenda?

Not all wild Pacific salmon

Not all wild Pacific salmon are immune to IHN. Yes, many are more resistant to it, but it is STILL a disease. Should our declining wild stock be exposed to intensified massive outbreaks? Absolutely NOT!
Studies have shown that juvenile sockeye that have not been previously exposed to IHN can have 100% mortality rates when exposed to IHN.
Even if you are pretty good at fighting off a cold would you send your children to live in a crowded emergency ward where 500,000 others are dying from it?

Sonya Saksida, in a report of the 2001-2003 IHN outbreak said that Atlantic salmon that are already "immune-compromised" due to over-crowding, fight or flight responses due to predators outside the net-pens, and especially other diseases common at salmon farms, succumb the quickest to IHN.
Let's not pretend that the "wild salmon" are the bad guys! Just get those poor Atlantics out of the ocean where they do not belong.
NOW.

i live on the coast

You can bad mouth me all you want and you can pump your atlantic fish all you want.How many farmed fish do you eat a month? I bet you dont eat any. Fish farms in the ocean
are toast, I know lets blame it on the wild salmon,thats why we have to kill all the fish in our pens.Why dont you also mention all the seals and sea lions you shoot every month and all the sea birds that die in your nets. Go swim
under any net pen and it is a dead zone from all the nice medicated food you feed them. Like i say i bet you dont eat any. Oh by the way i know people that work on fish farms i guess there all liars to. You can insult me all you want it
just shows how feeble you are

:) my my

The immutable fact remains: farmed salmon tastes like crap. Only those who have never enjoyed real salmon would gainsay this simple and absolute truth.

Confusing headline...Suspicion is different from knowing,

I'll let the expert speak:

The origins of the virus remain uncertain, said Sonja Saksida, executive director and researcher at the Centre for Aquatic Health Sciences, in Campbell River, B.C..

Based on studies of its genotype, though, she suspects it came from sockeye salmon migrating from Washington state.

Origin of virus remains uncertain but scientist "suspects"...perhaps its best to remain silent until there is actual certainty. Speculation and suspicion leads to misinformation and in the salmon farm industry's case, disinformation.

Relax, roady

No one is bad-mouthing you or insulting you. If you get tetchy when I suggest your approach is not constructive, and that you should research your claims a little bit more, maybe you need to take a look at yourself, not me. The anger pervasive in all your posts is a bit concerning.

I eat farmed salmon at least once a week, since you asked. I like both wild and farmed, but I prefer farmed.

I also live on the coast, and raise my children here. Aquaculture feeds my family. We also love sport fishing.

Your broad claims about the evils of salmon farming are not backed up by science. You might benefit from researching some different opinions, and taking a look at the science.

Shinoo, your characterization of Sonya Saksida's report about the IHN outbreak 10 years ago is wrong. Nowhere in the report does it state that Atlantic salmon were "immune-compromised" due to overcrowding. That is pure speculation and not backed up by science. Atlantic salmon are more susceptible to IHN because they are a different species of salmon, and have not evolved a resistance to IHN virus like Pacific salmon. Read the report for yourself: http://www.int-res.com/articles/dao2006/72/d072p213.pdf

Your characterization of how IHN affects wild salmon is also wrong. Yes, it can cause disease in wild salmon, but the only places this has been observed is in hatcheries. In fact, lab studies done on fish densities found that at density levels for eggs and alevins in natural conditions, which are very low, the risk of IHN causing disease is also very low. It is only in high-density situations, such as an artificial spawning channel where IHN-carrying spawners mingle with recently-hatched alevins and fry, that IHN is a serious risk to wild salmon.

The comment "the majority of

The comment "the majority of science out there shows that farming fish is a good thing to do" is not true.
It is indisputable that around the world where ever there is salmon farming there have been massive declines of wild salmon. I guess the operative phrase is "a good thing to do"

But good for what?
Feeding the hungry of the world? Not true. The demand for farmed salmon has been artificially induced and is for fat cats in first world countries. First Nation countries in South America have a hard time now eating their traditional dishes because it is now over-fished and ground up for farmed salmon a hemisphere away! What a huge foot print!
Creating jobs? Not true. Wild fisheries and tourism of healthy eco-systems still bring in much more money than salmon farms.

( GJW - I have read many reports about IHN, some by Sonja Saskida. If I had more time to find where it was shown that immune compromised farmed salmon are more susceptible to catching IHN I could try to show you! Lol. I agree that Atlantic salmon are more susceptible to IHN and I think that it is all the MORE REASON to get them out of the Pacific Ocean where they not able to withstand IHN! Wild salmon are not "bad guys!" )

And is it true that our tax dollars are given to the farms to replace the Atlantics that had to be culled ??? That's outrageous. It might actually be cheaper for us to pay the farms to NOT farm!

why not

well if your farmed salmon are so safe why not put it on land and then you can keep eating it.You keep eating it and keep feeding to your family.Why did norway punt it?????

farmed fish is a good thing to do.

Responses to Shinoo:

You say "It is indisputable that around the world where ever there is salmon farming there have been massive declines of wild salmon."

Yes, this is disputable because it is simply not true, or at best is a correlation of two unrelated things. Plus, you've got it backwards.

There have been massive declines of wild Atlantic salmon in Eastern North America because people have been fishing them like mad since the first colonists showed up, and even more so with the advent of mechanized fisheries.

There have been massive declines of wild Atlantic salmon in Europe because people have been fishing them since time immemorial, and even more so with the advent of mechanized fisheries.

Salmon farming was invented because people still wanted to eat Atlantic salmon, and there weren't enough left to meet demand.

Salmon farming is huge in Chile, and there haven't been any declines of wild salmon there, because there aren't any wild salmon there.

Salmon farming is booming in Russia, and so are their wild salmon runs, largely thanks to their enormous enhancement projects.

Salmon farming is static in B.C., which hasn't changed production levels for 12 years, and still wild salmon fluctuate because that's what they do. Maybe if we backed off on how much we catch, we would see those fluctuations even more up the positive end of the scale, like we did in 2010.

Salmon farming is a good thing to do 2

On why aquaculture is a good thing:

Aquaculture, includes farming all sorts of fish, not just salmon, and is a good thing to do because it's a way we can increase the amount of protein available to feed a growing world population. UN Secretary General Kofi Annan said as much this week: http://www.fishupdate.com/news/fullstory.php/aid/17739/Aquaculture_gains_top_level_recognition_as_a_contributor_to_future_food_production.html

I disagree that salmon is for "fat cats in first world countries." Farmed salmon, when it was first introduced, had the effect of radically lowering the price of all salmon in North America, and as a result, salmon has become a far more popular and regular part of people's diets in North America. Even the Alaskan fishermen acknowledge this, and have capitalized on the growing, regular demand for salmon by sending their frozen fish to China to be turned into salmon burgers and nuggets and shipped back to the US for resale. Talk about a carbon footprint! It's all in here: http://www.adfg.alaska.gov/static/fishing/PDFs/hatcheries/pars/2011-2-7_pwsac_pink_pars_attachment6_mcdowell.pdf

"First Nation countries in South America have a hard time now eating their traditional dishes because it is now over-fished and ground up for farmed salmon a hemisphere away!"

This is untrue. There is plenty of fish available for people in South America, the fish used in aquaculture feed are generally recognized as unfit for human consumption because they are too small and bony. The amount of fish meal and oil produced from those fish, and the amount of fish taken from those fisheries, has not changed significantly in the last 20 years. Agriculture is using less fishmeal and fish oil, and aquaculture, even though it is steadily growing, is using about the same amount as it was 10 years ago. http://www.iffo.net/default.asp?contentID=718
http://www.iffo.net/downloads/Responding%20to%20our%20critics/Responding%20to%20our%20Crititcs%20-%20Aquaculture%20Growth%20_EN_%20_Nov%2010_.pdf

And it's only since 2006 that Peruvians have drastically increased their consumption of anchovies, thanks to a government campaign encouraging them to do so.

Aquaculture is a good thing to do 3

(Whoops, meant to say "Aquaculture is a good thing to do" in previous headline, although I do believe salmon farming is a good thing to do.)

Also, aquaculture does create jobs, particularly full-time jobs with full benefits in small coastal communities, which neither commercial or recreational fisheries provide. True, it doesn't generate as many jobs or as much money as commercial and recreational fishing, but so what? Diversity is good in an economy, and without aquaculture there are many communities around Vancouver Island which would be hard hit economically.

About immune-compromised: I have no doubt that "immune compromised farmed salmon are more susceptible to catching IHN" but that's not what you originally said. You said "Atlantic salmon that are already "immune-compromised" due to over-crowding, fight or flight responses due to predators outside the net-pens, and especially other diseases common at salmon farms, succumb the quickest to IHN." This might be true, but I can't find any evidence for it, nor any evidence that Saksida said it.

Finally, no one is saying wild salmon are bad guys. These things happen in farming. Wild animals can pass diseases to farmed ones, which are more susceptible because they live in closer quarters. But that's why farmers make sure their stocks are healthy, to make sure they can resist the inevitable encounters with viruses and disease.

Response for roady

Norway did not "punt" salmon farms. They still have lots, and they have wild salmon too.

And if we farm salmon on land, where will all the fresh water and electricity come from? What will be the environmental costs? Shall we build more hydro dams and threaten more wild salmon runs with a definite obstacle in their path, so we can get farms out of the ocean? That would be replacing a potential and perceived risk to wild salmon with a definite risk and definite habitat destruction.

who do work for

Cermac or Marine Harvest?? Go on utube and punch in Alexandra Morton.Enough said

roady?

Why does it matter who I work for? I clearly stated I work in aquaculture, so my bias is clear. But the facts I present stand, regardless of who I work for.

And why should I look up Alexandra Morton on Youtube? How does that relate to what we have discussed here? Is she always right? Can you show me where I am wrong? Are the facts I have presented wrong? I'd like to know.

the Science

I'll guess der Harpenfuhrer has made sure we will never really know: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-16861468

When ya got nuttin', Part Deux

Thanks 'roady', for reminding me that in addition to "mutations" and "petri dish offspring" and "pecuniary interests" and "blah blah blah", people that got nuttin' also resort to "it tastes like crap". You guys are funny.

And relax, it's not an insult to your person, it's an insult to your agenda. A tired, obvious, bullheaded agenda that is getting ripped apart each time you post.

"Enough said"? NO, DON'T STOP SAYING! The more you say, the more you put your size 5 and 3/4 in it.

Go ahead, have the last word, would love to hear it.

I thought

ad hominem space wasting posts weren't allowed here?

keep eating it

keep eating it

ALEXANDRA MORTON

ALEXANDRA MORTON

all the dead seals

dead seals,shot,dead sealions,shot,dead sea birds,dead caught in fish farn nets

They seized the evidence?

http://grist.org/food/sea-sick-another-virus-crashes-canadas-salmon-farms/