TVOntario scalded for one-sided fish farm fiasco
There has been a lot of media attention paid to the salmon farming industry in British Columbia over the years, and this year is no exemption. But the general scenario is most often predictable; journalists come here with a pre-conceived opinion about what is going on, and they come here to gather pictures and information that can support their already-written stories. As a recent example of this phenomenon, a couple of writers calling themselves “The Water Brothers” came to B.C. and convinced some salmon farmers to show them what the industry is all about. But when their story was told, it became obvious to an industry operator that “the Water Brothers’ ears were apparently too waterlogged to hear anything when they visited BC last year”. A letter from the B.C. Salmon Farmers Association about this issue is posted on the Positive Aquaculture Awareness organization’s web site, and a posting by the salmon farming company Mainstream Canada provides more details;
Judging by the TVO (TV Ontario) show’s co-host Alex Mifflin’s Oct. 14, 2013 Huffington Post blog post, and the brothers’ description of their salmon farming episode which airs this afternoon, they chose to ignore facts in favour of the fearmongering promoted by anti-salmon farming activists. By selectively ignoring facts, this taxpayer-funded program is doing a great disservice to its viewers.
Pacific salmon stocks are not all the same
In his blog post, Mifflin points out that “whenever humans really like a particular type of fish, that popularity guarantees a rapid decline in their population,” showing how that in the past 60 years, sockeye have declined from Alaska to California. This is true; however, he fails to point out that less popular Pacific salmon species, particularly pink salmon and chum, are healthy and have had record returns in recent years.
Fish waste has a small impact on the seafloor
Mifflin suggests that waste and fecal matter from salmon farms smothers the seafloor below and the marine life there. And in comparing fish waste to human waste, he makes a serious error. Human waste can have a large, negative impact on ocean environments because it is unnatural to those environments. In the ocean, however, all fish poop.
What he fails to point out, despite being told and shown by salmon farmers, is that farms are sited in deep water locations with strong tides which disperses most of the waste. Research has shown that the waste can actually have a positive effect on the food web, providing nutrients for the creatures at the bottom of the food chain. The seafloor below salmon farms is in deep, dark water where there is little immobile life to “smother.” Sunlight cannot penetrate to those depths in amounts great enough to sustain vegetation. Some waste does collect beneath some salmon farm pens, but sites are positioned to minimize impacts. Waste is mostly localized directly beneath the farm sites, which have a footprint the size of less than two-and-one-half NFL football fields. The waste naturally disperses over time, and sites are fallowed regularly to allow this to happen.
Antibiotics are rarely used
Mifflin suggests that “antibiotics and pesticides that are occasionally added into salmon feeds can also flow into surrounding waters and be consumed by wild salmon and other fish species.” This is extremely unlikely. Antibiotics and the one drug we use to treat sea lice (we do not use pesticides) are used sparingly. Last year, we used less than five grams of antibiotics per tonne of fish produced, and less than one gram of the SLICE sea lice treatment per tonne of fish produced. Farmers use cameras to watch the fish while they eat, as Mifflin witnessed while filming their latest episode, and shut off the feeders as soon as the fish stop eating to avoid wasting feed pellets. It is extremely unlikely that any wild fish in surrounding waters consume any antibiotics and pesticides from salmon farms.
Atlantic salmon have never colonized BC, despite deliberate introductions
Mifflin suggests that Atlantic salmon that escape from BC farms “can displace wild salmon species by reproducing and consuming their natural food supply.” Obviously he ignored the information he was provided by salmon farmers, showing how as early as 1874 people deliberately introduced Atlantic salmon to the Pacific coast in attempts to establish them for sport fishing. These attempts continued until 1991, and introduced tens of millions of Atlantic salmon to the Pacific coast. None of them were able to colonize Pacific waters.
Farm infections can happen, but we have learned to manage them well
Mifflin uses the example of the IHN infection at two of our farms last year to suggest there are flaws in how we manage infections. However, he fails to point out how little impact the 2012 infections had, compared to only a decade ago, when 36 farms were impacted and 12 million fish were killed. Salmon farmers have learned from past mistakes and have found better, more effective ways to prevent infections and the spread of disease. Mifflin ignores the progress salmon farmers have made in a very short time.
ISA virus would kill our fish first
He goes on to repeat claims made by anti-salmon farming activists about the ISA virus, suggesting that “If ISA ever spreads into wild Pacific salmon populations in Canada, the results could be even more devastating for both the wild Pacific salmon stocks and marine ecosystems.” The ISA virus kills farmed Atlantic salmon. We would notice right away if this virus ever found its way to BC. We don’t want it here, and do everything we can to prevent from coming here. Mifflin ignores this obvious fact, and also ignores research which shows that Pacific salmon are highly resistant to the ISA virus.
Farmed salmon are highly efficient
Despite having access to salmon farmers, feed manufacturers and other experts for his film, Mifflin fails to understand how farmed salmon are a highly efficient use of resources. He says the “biggest flaw” of salmon farming is that “to produce one kilogram of farmed salmon, they must be fed around 1.2 to 3 kilograms of wild fish. As wild fish stocks continue to be depleted worldwide and we look to aquaculture as the future of seafood, the solution should never involve feeding farmed salmon a diet of wild fish that contributes to the depletion of wild fish stocks.” We agree — that’s why over the past decade the amount of fish meal and fish oil used in our feed has been drastically reduced, as Mifflin was told in his interview with the managing director of EWOS Canada, our feed supplier. We only source ingredients from sustainable fisheries, and are constantly finding new ways to reduce the amount of marine ingredients we use. Mifflin must be unaware of how efficient this is compared to any other farmed livestock, and how efficient this is compared to wild salmon. The ocean food web is divided into trophic levels. Creatures eat 10 times their weight of creatures in the level below them. That means wild salmon eat 10 times their weight.
Opinion, not education
It appears from this blog post that the Water Brothers had the story they wanted to tell all planned out before they visited any aquaculture facilities in BC and interviewed any farmers or experts in the field. Educational programming is supposed to present facts fairly, not force an opinion on viewers. It is disappointing that the Water Brothers took this approach, and that TVO has lent its name to it.
