Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > 'Environmental Nightmare' After Thousands Of Atlantic Salmon Escape Fish Farm 08/24/17
 Reply to topic
Previous :: Next Topic
Author Message
Gregory
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Mar 2014
Posts: 386 | TRs | Pics
Gregory
Member
PostTue Feb 20, 2018 7:45 am 
Randyhiker, Unfortunately, you may be assuming that any of the players give a rats a.. about the ecosystem. It is all about money from the guv to the farmers to the tribes.If it was about the ecosystem or in my case just a pure love for our anadromous fish, farmed fish would be the new protien.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostTue Feb 20, 2018 12:05 pm 
Gregory, thank you very much. It looks like my gut feeling was correct: Ken Beardslee at Wild Fish Conservancy appears to be drawing lines between dots that do not exist. Apparently the rebuttal response from Ken Warheit at WDFW was not sent out to those on WDFW's email list, but was sent to the press. huh.gif Virus in escaped fish common not harmful to salmon in Washington waters, state says
Ken Warheit, WDFW, on 02/16/18 in response to WFC's press release of 02/15/18 wrote:
WDFW review of Wild Fish Conservancy’s Feb. 15 news release on presence of virus in escaped Atlantic salmon February 16, 2018 Summary of key points The following points are fully elaborated in the material below, prepared by Dr. Kenneth Warheit, fish health and genetic specialist for the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife: • The Wild Fish Conservancy’s news release confuses the virus (PRV) with the disease (HSMI), misuses the scientific literature to exaggerate risks to native salmon, and fails to find a single study to support the claim that PRV from open-water pens will harm wild fish. • The Conservancy asserts – without evidence – that HSMI will harm wild salmon. However, HSMI has never been detected in our native salmon or any other fish except farmed Atlantic salmon. • PRV occurs naturally and was first confirmed in the Salish Sea from fish samples taken in 1987. The Conservancy provides no data or scientific research to support its claim that the PRV found in escaped fish originated in Norway. • WDFW methodically and objectively investigates PRV and other fish health issues. We are increasing surveillance for the virus in both Atlantic salmon and in our hatcheries. At present, PRV is not recognized as a pathogen of concern by the World Organization for Animal Health. Review of Wild Fish Conservancy news release The press release is dated February 15, 2015. The following are general comments about the document (bullets), followed by specific responses to statements made in the press release. The numbered comments below correspond to annotations made in a copy of the press release included with this document. • Wild Fish Conservancy (WFC) appears to be confused by the difference between the virus PRV (Piscine Orthoreovirus) and the associated disease HSMI. WFC exaggerates the risk associated with the presence of PRV, based on current scientific knowledge; and WFC fails to recognize that the presence of PRV does not equal the presence of disease, that most fish with PRV do not exhibit clinical or microscopic signs of disease, and that both farmed Atlantic salmon and free-swimming native Pacific salmon have PRV but only farmed Atlantic salmon get clinical signs of HSMI. • WFC repeatedly makes statements that appear to be based on science by citing published scientific papers in defense of their statements; but in many, perhaps most cases the published papers do not support their statements. These published papers either do not address their statements, or provide information that is counter to their statements. Where the published papers are consistent with WFC’s statements, the statements generally overstate the conclusions in the published papers. • Without evidence, WFC states that PRV itself originated in Norway, and they imply, also without evidence, that the strain of PRV detected in the 19 fish they tested was brought to Washington from Norway. • WFC misuses the scientific literature to exaggerate the risk that the August 2017 Cypress #2 accident will harm native salmon with a disease (HSMI) that has never been detected in our native Pacific salmon or any fish other than farmed Atlantic salmon. 1. WDFW never claimed that PRV was not present in escaped Atlantic salmon. In fact, in the State’s report investigating the Cypress #2 accident, WDFW was the first to report the presence of PRV in the escaped Atlantic salmon. Ms. Amy Windrope’s quote that appeared in WFC’s press release was accurate and subsequent statements at the press briefing specifically dealt with the presence of PRV and stated that WDFW found PRV in the escaped Atlantic salmon. None of the escaped Atlantic salmon with PRV examined by WDFW had HSMI. 2. PRV is a virus that is present in both captive Atlantic salmon and free-swimming native Pacific salmon. In most cases, fish with PRV are healthy, and show no signs of disease. The syndrome HSMI has been associated with PRV in Atlantic salmon aquaculture only. HSMI affects only a small subset of captive Atlantic salmon with PRV and in most cases HSMI is not fatal. See attached White Paper. 3. WFC claims that PRV is “highly contagious and debilitating,” and cites the scientific publication Wessel et al. as the source for their statement. But, the results from Wessel et al. do not support WFC’s claim; however, Wessel et al. do state “PRV is ubiquitous in farmed Atlantic salmon and thus present also in apparently healthy individuals.” The published paper indicates that in the laboratory, PRV produced microscopic signs that are consistent with HSMI, but in this study none of the fish developed a debilitating disease, and none of the fish died as a result of infection. 4. Neither the Wessel et al. nor the DiCicco et al. papers state that there are “significant mortalities from HSMI,” as WFC claims. Wessel et al. state that “[h]istopathological lesions in the heart can be found in most fish in an affected sea cage while the cumulative mortality [in Norway] ranges from insignificant to 20%.” DiCicco et al. state “[t]he disease [HSMI] has been reported also in Scotland . . . and Chile.” The data presented by DiCicco et al. for the BC farm indicates that about 0.2% of the affected fish died from HSMI. 5. WFC states that the “spread of PRV from farmed Atlantic to wild salmon has been well documented,” and cites Garver et al. as that documentation. Garver et al. describes a laboratory study where through injections and forced cohabitation the investigators demonstrate that PRV can be highly infectious. Therefore, this research does not state that PRV spreads from farmed Atlantic to wild salmon. However, it is likely that wild salmon can be infected with PRV from farmed salmon, and likewise, farmed salmon can be infected by wild salmon. Furthermore, in addition to WFC’s misuse of the Garver et al. research, they omitted another finding of Garver et al.: even with the high infectivity of PRV, none of the test fish showed any clinical or microscopic signs of disease. 6. This paragraph is entirely speculative and not based on any “peer-reviewed science,” as claimed by WFC. WFC states that “the virus may reduce the amount of oxygen cells can transport to the fish’s muscles,” and cites another paper published by Wessel et al. However, the cited paper does not support WFC’s statement: “[a]lthough the present study suggests salmon RBC [red blood cells] can tolerate high amounts of PRV, it is not known how it affects other important erythrocyte functions, such as oxygen transport.” 7. The quote attributed to Amy Windrope was based on clinical examination, by a licensed veterinarian, of escaped Atlantic salmon re-captured soon after the spill. The veterinarian determined that these fish were indeed healthy, that is, free from disease. These fish were tested for regulated pathogens, not for PRV, which is not a regulated pathogen nor is it recognized by the World Organization for Animal Health (OIE) as a pathogen of concern. The quote attributed to Amy Windrope is accurate. WFC continues to inaccurately state the difference between a virus (PRV) and a disease (HSMI). 8. WFC is disingenuous when they label PRV as a “Norwegian virus” and WFC is implying that the PRV detected in the 19 fish they tested was brought here from Norway. PRV has been present in Salish Sea waters since at least 1987. There is a scientific debate in the peer-reviewed literature as to the origin of the PRV (eastern Pacific v Atlantic). This debate centers on viral genetics since there is little direct epidemiological evidence as to the origin of PRV. An objective evaluation, based on current information and analyses, would indicate that the origin of PRV is not known. Nevertheless and more importantly, it is unknown as to where the escaped Atlantic salmon contracted PRV. It is conceivable that the fish contracted the virus in Cooke Aquaculture’s Rochester hatchery, which if true would suggest that all the Atlantic salmon in the net pens have PRV. This would be consistent with what is known about the prevalence of PRV in Atlantic salmon net pens in British Columbia, and not a surprising result here in Washington. Alternatively, it is also conceivable that the fish entered the net pens free of PRV and contracted the virus from wild fish—a scenario that is also common in British Columbia. 9. WFC provided no data or citations that support their claim that the PRV present in the escaped fish are of Norwegian origin. See comment #8 above. In addition, although PRV genetic sequences from eastern Pacific closely resemble that from Norway, there are differences between these sets of sequences, and it would have been more informative if WFC provided information about the sequences, rather than speculating about the origin of the PRV found in the escaped Atlantic salmon. 10. Despite WFC’s claim that there is a “multitude of scientific studies,” they failed to cite a single scientific study “that demonstrate[s] PRV from open-water pens will likely spread to and harm wild fish.” WFC also failed to state that PRV is present in native Pacific salmonids from Alaska to at least Washington, and in all cases these native fish showed no clinical or microscopic signs of HSMI or any other disease related to being infected with PRV. WDFW is methodical and objective in our evaluation of PRV, and we plan to increase surveillance for the virus in both Atlantic salmon and within our hatcheries. WDFW has been truthful with WFC and with anyone who asks us about PRV. The Pacific Northwest Fish Health Protection Committee made up of virologists, pathologists, geneticists, and veterinarians have produced a White Paper on PRV and HSMI. WDFW’s current management associated with PRV is consistent with that White Paper.

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostTue Feb 20, 2018 12:08 pm 
Gregory, am I crazy, or is there some sort of loop between Beardslee and Alexandra Morton and this "Kibenge" lab that lost its accreditation? Can you shed any light on that one? I poke around on the sites and read, but I can only read so much before I have to dismiss it as hyperbolic hysteria. Is this a deal like Fox News where they just create their own echo chamber?

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostTue Feb 20, 2018 2:05 pm 
Tuesday February 20, 2017 11:50 PST
Wild Fish Conservancy, in their press release of 02/20/18 wrote:
Wild Fish Conservancy stands firm behind PRV statements February 20th, 2018 For immediate release. In light of Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (WDFW) response to Wild Fish Conservancy’s (WFC) press release on February 15th, we stand firm behind our original statements, and aim to briefly but fully clarify our position on the matter of Piscine Orthoreovirus (PRV) of Norwegian origin found in escaped farmed Atlantic salmon in Puget Sound. It is our intention that this clarification will dispel any charges of inaccuracy when it comes to the PRV threat. As is stated in the original release, WFC received independent lab results confirming the presence of PRV in 19 of 19 farmed Atlantic salmon tested that had escaped from a large-scale escape event off of Cypress Island in August 2017. Furthermore, testing of the samples showed the strain of PRV to be of Norwegian origin. Specifically, the S1 gene from tissue samples from eight of the 19 fish were sequenced and all identified as Geneotype 1a, which is known to be of Norwegian origin. We take issue with a number of claims made by WDFW in response to this press release, mainly that the agency did not attempt to accurately represent WFC’s views on the matter, and that WDFW is not taking an appropriately precautionary approach when it comes to evidence of a potentially harmful virus being proliferated in Washington’s public waters. WDFW mischaracterizes our view regarding the Heart and Skeletal Muscle Inflammatory (HSMI) disease. In the press release we accurately state that HSMI has caused up to 20% mortality in Norwegian net pens. We also state that PRV is known to be the causative agent of HSMI, which has been well documented. We do not claim, however, that HSMI has been shown to occur in wild Atlantic or Pacific salmon and steelhead. We do not confuse HSMI with PRV, but we do express unease over PRV’s demonstrated relationship to the lethal disease. We are clear that our primary concern is with infection of the virus itself and the concerning possibility that it may cause harm to wild salmon and steelhead, particularly juveniles. In the press release, WFC states: “As PRV builds up in a salmon’s red blood cells, the virus may reduce the amount of oxygen cells can transport to the fish’s muscles, lowering the fish’s performance. For a wild fish, reduced performance means a reduced ability to capture prey, evade predators, and swim upriver to spawn.” This quote identifies a credible biological mechanism by which PRV infection may lead to increased mortality in wild salmon and steelhead. Even in the absence of HSMI, there is the potential for PRV infection to harm wild fish. We believe this potential for harm should not be taken lightly, especially considering the status of the wild ESA-listed salmon and steelhead in Puget Sound. WFC additionally takes issue with the claim that escaped Atlantic salmon were infected with PRV as a result of stress in the aftermath of escape. 100% of escaped Atlantic salmon tested by both WDFW and WFC (a total of 23 fish) tested positive for PRV. In a recent broad effort to survey for disease among Alaska and Washington, only 4.6% of Chinook, Coho, and steelhead sampled in Puget Sound tested positive for the virus, a finding that dispels the notion that PRV is ubiquitous among wild fish. Similarly, Norway’s wild salmon disease surveillance program data shows that escaped farmed Atlantic salmon in wild salmon rivers have much higher levels of PRV infection (55% of fish sampled) than either wild-origin conservation hatchery brood stock (24%) or wild salmon (13%). Lacking data that would indicate the absence of the disease prior to escape, WDFW cannot state with any amount of certainty that the disease was contracted in the days following the escape. As for the issue of the virus’ origin, WFC strongly disagrees with WDFW’s implication that PRV in Puget Sound and the Salish Sea originated in the Pacific Northwest, rather than being imported from Norway. Our independent lab results identified the S1 gene samples of Atlantic salmon as Geneotype 1a, which is known to be of Norwegian origin. WDFW’s implication that the virus is native to the Salish Sea is, at best, highly controversial. Our evaluation of the recent scientific literature on this issue leads us to conclude, in agreement with a majority of researchers who have published on the matter, that it is highly improbable that PRV is native to the eastern Pacific Ocean, and that its presence in Puget Sound and the Salish Sea is the result of importation from Norway. Much of WDFW’s reply treats the press release as if it were a detailed scientific article, rather than a news brief presenting a summary of critical information. In the release WFC provided members of the press and public with references to the relevant scientific journal articles that informed our position; those interested in digging deeper are encouraged to dig deeper. Still, a press release is necessarily brief and general. It is not a scientific document, and a reviewer should not treat it as such. The testing of the tissue samples from the Atlantic salmon that escaped from the Cypress Island pen, the general results of which we announced in the press release, is part of an ongoing collaborative research project soon to be published in a major scientific journal. Contact information has been provided at the bottom of this press release, please don’t hesitate to contact WFC to request more information regarding the information provided in this release. When it comes to the impacts of PRV on our wild salmon and steelhead, the science strongly indicates that Washington state agencies need to take a measured and precautionary approach, not a dismissive one. In Puget Sound, wild Pacific salmon and steelhead find themselves at considerable risk, with several species threatened with extinction and many surviving at only a fraction of their historical abundance. Even a small amount of risk from the spread of PRV, compounded with the other stressors our wild fish populations face, has the potential to bring about disastrous consequences to already imperiled wild salmon and steelhead. Due to this concern, a measured and precautionary approach dictates that state agencies must err heavily on the side of caution. The burden of proof that PRV does not cause harm to wild fish does not rest on wild fish. The burden of proof, rather, lies squarely with the Atlantic salmon net pen industry and regulatory state agencies. This burden has yet to be shouldered by the industry and its defenders. To date, WFC has not seen sufficient evidence from either of these entities that PRV will not harm wild fish. In standing firm on our concern over the impacts of PRV to wild Pacific salmon, WFC calls on WDFW and other state agencies to accomplish the following: 1. Stop all restocking of Atlantic salmon net pens until thorough industry-independent testing has proven the Atlantic salmon hatchery is not planting PRV infected fish. 2. Immediately test all Atlantic salmon net pens in Puget Sound for PRV. 3. Remove all PRV-infected Atlantic salmon from Puget Sound net pens. 4. Immediately disinfect facilities showing any trace of PRV. We maintain that these actions are essential to ensure that PRV-infected fish are not being planted into public waters and that Atlantic salmon raised in net pens are not amplifying and spreading the virus in public waters where it places our native salmon and steelhead at risk. For more information, please contact: Kurt Beardslee, Executive Director (425) 788-1167 Or email us at: info@wildfishconservancy.org

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Randito
Snarky Member



Joined: 27 Jul 2008
Posts: 9495 | TRs | Pics
Location: Bellevue at the moment.
Randito
Snarky Member
PostTue Feb 20, 2018 3:49 pm 
Gregory wrote:
Randyhiker, Unfortunately, you may be assuming that any of the players give a rats a.. about the ecosystem. It is all about money from the guv to the farmers to the tribes.If it was about the ecosystem or in my case just a pure love for our anadromous fish, farmed fish would be the new protien.
I'm not assuming anything about those players, other than they are more likely to serve the interests of various political interest groups. I'm saying that if ensuring the survival of salmon runs and creatures that depend on salmon was the actual goal, that harvesting wild salmon for human consumption makes little sense. Every fish taken is one less fish for orcas, seals, sea lions, etc, etc.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostWed Feb 21, 2018 11:31 am 
... in other news.... Atlantic salmon farming company sues Washington State to keep its Port Angeles site open / Lynda Mapes, Seattle Times / 01/05/18

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Gregory
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Mar 2014
Posts: 386 | TRs | Pics
Gregory
Member
PostThu Feb 22, 2018 7:59 am 
Ski I just poked my nose in here and have to go to work but will get back to ya. Yes, it is much like msnbc and Russian collusion.LOL, You are right about connecting dots that are not there.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Gregory
Member
Member


Joined: 08 Mar 2014
Posts: 386 | TRs | Pics
Gregory
Member
PostFri Feb 23, 2018 8:11 am 
Ken Beardslee at Wild Fish Conservancy appears to be drawing lines between dots that do not exist. True.With the tribes and Inslee on the same page, they are hoping to cash in.To me, it is the potential that is dangerous to our wild stocks. Gregory, am I crazy, or is there some sort of loop between Beardslee and Alexandra Morton and this "Kibenge" lab that lost its accreditation? I do not know the answer to this but they are both rowing the same boat now.Canada has been vicious and blatant in their support of the farms.I am sure they are watching closely what WFC does in our crooked courts. I got to get out the door again. There is no science that shows farmed Atlantics mixing genetically with Pacific stocks.There is no science showing disease affecting Pacific stocks.But that same science, minus politics, is the study of mother natures dynamics.The risk of either of these to worries being dynamic is scary. Wfc and other orgs like the Hood canal enhancement group start out well-meaning but end up all about the money, not the fish, unfortunately.If the hceg were to succeed they would lose their funding and have to begin job hunting.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostWed Mar 28, 2018 1:17 pm 
HB2957 signed into law by Hon. Governor Jay Inslee 03/22/18 http://apps2.leg.wa.gov/billsummary?BillNumber=2957&Year=2017&BillNumber=2957&Year=2017 as passed by legislature: http://lawfilesext.leg.wa.gov/biennium/2017-18/Pdf/Bills/House%20Passed%20Legislature/2957.PL.pdf section 1 vetoed: https://crmpublicwebservice.des.wa.gov/bats/attachment/vetomessage/598220db-3b2e-e811-812c-005056ba1db5 ========================================================= adios, Cooke Aquaculture! up.gif

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostThu May 17, 2018 2:49 pm 
Thursday May 17, 2018 14:08 PDT WDFW NEWS RELEASE WDFW denies permit for company to place 800,000 Atlantic salmon into Puget Sound net pens OLYMPIA – Citing the risk of fish disease transmission, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife has denied permission for Cooke Aquaculture to transport 800,000 juvenile Atlantic salmon from its hatchery near Rochester to net pens at Rich Passage in Kitsap County. In late April, Cooke applied for permission to move juvenile non-native salmon from its hatchery into pens in Kitsap County to replace adult fish that were recently harvested. Washington lawmakers enacted a bill earlier this year that will phase out Atlantic salmon aquaculture by 2022, but Cooke plans to continue to operate until then. WDFW officials cited two factors in denying the permit that they said would increase the risk of disease transmission within the net pens and possibly to wild and hatchery-raised Pacific salmon outside the pens: The population of Atlantic salmon that would have been transported from Cooke's hatchery near Rochester tested positive for a form of the fish virus PRV (piscine orthoreovirus) that is essentially the same as the PRV that occurs at the Iceland hatchery from which Cooke receives Atlantic salmon eggs. The Icelandic form of PRV is not known to occur in the eastern Pacific Ocean or Puget Sound, so WDFW classifies it as "exotic" in Washington. Cooke proposed to place fish into pens that have not been empty (or "fallow") for at least 30 days after the most recent harvest of adult fish, and within a farm that still contains adult Atlantic salmon. These actions would contradict the company's own management plan. "Each of these factors raised an unacceptable risk of introducing an exotic strain of PRV into Washington marine waters," said WDFW fish health manager Ken Warheit. "This would represent an unknown and therefore unacceptable risk of disease transmission." Warheit said samples of the juvenile fish that would have been transported were collected by an independent licensed veterinarian under contract with Cooke. The samples were tested for PRV at the Washington Animal Disease Diagnostic Laboratory at Washington State University. Test results were confirmed at the U.S. Geological Survey's Washington Fisheries Research Center. Until recently, Cooke operated up to nine net pens in Puget Sound, including one at Cypress Island in Skagit County that collapsed last August and allowed approximately 250,000 Atlantic salmon to escape. The company's latest permit application is not related to the Cypress Island operation or the August mishap. -WDFW-

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostThu Aug 16, 2018 7:15 pm 
Thursday August 16, 2018 16:15 PDT
Wild Fish Conservancy wrote:
Judge Rejects Motion by Federal Agencies and Net Pen Industry to Dismiss WFC Lawsuit, Warns Agencies' Claims Border on the Frivolous Wild Fish Enthusiasts, On Tuesday August 7th, a federal judge denied motions filed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), NOAA Fisheries Service (NOAA), and by industry giant Cooke Aquaculture to dismiss all claims in an on-going suit filed by Wild Fish Conservancy (WFC) under section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA). Judge Barbara J. Rothstein denied two separate motions intended to dismiss the case, thereby allowing all four of WFC's causes of action to go forward against NOAA and the EPA. The case focuses on Atlatnic salmon net pen aquaculture and the potential risk to ESA-listed species. In her written order to dismiss, the federal judge strongly criticized the federal agencies' argument that they have no legal responsibility to consider the adverse effects of Atlantic salmon farms when consulting on approval of state regulations. Excerpts from Judge Barbara J. Rothstein's Order: “The Agency’s post hoc claim in this litigation that its prior consultations were “voluntary,” and that it had no duty to review the effects of net pens, including disease and escapement—and in fact, no duty to conduct a consultation at all—is simply not credible." "The Agency’s position—which would have the question of whether or not an agency has a duty to consult turn on the outcome of a consultation—borders on the frivolous." Click Here to Read the Full Order: https://gallery.mailchimp.com/86d93c48268d84a1b0bd41ba1/files/b303522c-5255-4008-a23c-288b60e621bf/089.order.defs.m_dismiss_1_.pdf History of WFC's Case Against NOAA Fisheries Service and the EPA In 2008, WFC brought a lawsuit against NOAA and the EPA for putting ESA-listed salmon and Southern Resident killer whales at risk of harm by failing to consult best available science when approving state regulations for Atlantic salmon aquaculture. At the time, the agencies even failed to take into consideration NOAA's own recovery plans for both species. In April 2010, the judge ruled in favor of WFC and ordered the federal agencies to reconsider the effects of Atlantic salmon net pens on ESA-listed species using best available science, as mandated under the ESA. EPA and NOAA announced in 2011 they had completed another informal review and maintain their stance that the regulations in place are adequate. They concluded that Atlantic salmon net pen aquaculture is “not likely to adversely affect” any ESA-listed species in Puget Sound. In November 2015, WFC filed a new case under section 7 of the ESA challenging the agencies' 2011 informal review and alleging that a 2011 outbreak of IHNv, an infectious virus that can amplify transmission to wild salmon, required the agencies to reinitiate their ESA consultation. Under this section of the law, EPA and NOAA are required to promptly reinitiate a prior consultation if new scientific evidence or information suggests greater harm to ESA-listed species than considered during prior consultation. The case was nearly ready for presentation to the Court when one of the net pens at Cypress Island facility collapsed in August 2017 resulting in the escape of an estimated 260,000 non-native Atlantic salmon into Puget Sound. Scientific research suggests escape events, both large and small, have the potential to harm the food source, habitat, and health of ESA-listed salmon. WFC then amended its claims in late-2017 to allege this disaster is another event requiring that EPA and NOAA reinitiate their 2011 consultation to evaluate the effects of Atlantic salmon farms on threatened salmonids, and consequently Southern Resident killer whales. The federal agencies’ continued failure to reinitiate is particularly disconcerting given a Washington state agency’s report into the cause of the spill that found 100% of sampled escaped fish were positive for Piscine Reovirus (PRV), a debilitating salmonid virus with potentially lethal implications for native salmon. NOAA and EPA argue that it is the responsibility of the state and not federal agencies to regulate net pens and that the federal agencies therefore have no ESA resonsibiliaties with resepct to the effects of Atlantic salmon farms. In spring 2018, the agencies filed a motion to dismiss the case on these grounds and were joined by Cooke Aquaculture, owner of all Atlantic salmon net pen in Puget Sound. Last Tuesday August 7th, a federal judge rejected these motions and the case will continue to move forward. Wild Fish Conservancy is represented in this matter by Kampmeier & Knutsen, PLLC, with offices in Seattle, Washington and Portland, Oregon. Washington's remaining Atlantic salmon net pens will continue to operate until 2022 when the final leases expire. Without proper science-based regulations in place, Puget Sound's ESA-listed salmonids and Southern Resident killer whales will continue to face harm at the expense of the commercial Atlantic salmon industry. Tuesday's ruling represents a major and critical step forward toward adequately protecting these treasured species and holding our federal agencies accountable. As the case progresses, we will be sure to keep you updated. If you'd like to support our legal efforts please consider donating to the Wild Fish Conservancy. Best, Wild Fish Conservancy

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostTue Aug 28, 2018 10:45 pm 
Tuesday August 28, 2018 17:26 PDT WDFW NEWS RELEASE WDFW authorizes transfer of Atlantic salmon into net pens OLYMPIA – The Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) has authorized Cooke Aquaculture to transport about 800,000 juvenile Atlantic salmon from the company's hatchery in Rochester, Wash., to existing net-pen facilities in Puget Sound. WDFW issued the fish transport permit this week after working to ensure Cooke had met all of the state's requirements for fish health. Earlier this year, state lawmakers passed legislation to phase out Atlantic salmon net pen operations in Puget Sound as soon as 2022. Cooke is continuing its operations in the meantime. On Aug. 2, Cooke submitted applications to move a total of 800,000 1-year-old Atlantic salmon from its Scatter Creek facility in Rochester to two different net pen locations in Puget Sound. Both WDFW and Cooke tested samples of the fish, which met the state's health requirements, including testing negative for all forms of the fish virus PRV (piscine orthoreovirus), said Ken Warheit, WDFW's fish health manager. Cooke typically transports fish eggs from an Iceland facility to Scatter Creek, where the eggs grow into smolts before being moved to net pens. In May, an exotic strain of PRV that shows up in north Atlantic waters was detected in a different batch of smolts at Cooke's Scatter Creek facility. WDFW denied the company's request to transfer those fish into net pens. The state also requires that Cooke leave its net pens empty (or "fallow") for at least 30 days before transferring fish there. Warheit noted that Cooke will also meet this requirement as it transfers fish in October and November. Cooke will move about 400,000 juvenile Atlantic salmon to its Cooke's Hope Island facility in Skagit Bay and another 400,000 fish to its Orchard Rocks facility (Kitsap County) in Rich Passage. All future notifications about Atlantic salmon transfer permits will be posted online at https://wdfw.wa.gov/ais/salmo_salar/ where people will be able to sign up for email notifications in the near future. -WDFW-

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostWed Oct 02, 2019 5:18 pm 
Wednesday, October 2, 2019 14:57 PDT WDFW NEWS RELEASE WDFW seeks SEPA public comment on Cooke Aquaculture farming of rainbow trout/steelhead OLYMPIA – Yesterday, the Washington Department of Fish and Wildlife (WDFW) began a 21-day public comment period regarding Cooke Aquaculture’s proposal to farm sterile (triploid) rainbow trout/steelhead in Puget Sound. The Department posted a State Environmental Policy Act (SEPA) mitigated determination of non-significance that analyzes the environmental impacts of Cooke’s proposal to transition from farming Atlantic salmon to farming steelhead in several of the company’s existing facilities. These facilities include four net pens located near Rich Passage and Skagit Bay, but in the future may cover three more Puget Sound net pens currently owned by Cooke. “Given the escape of Atlantic salmon in 2017, we know that there is a heightened sense of concern around the impacts of fish aquaculture in Puget Sound,” said WDFW Fish Program Director Kelly Cunningham. “We want to hear from the public about Cooke Aquaculture’s proposal and our proposed permit requirements.” In addition to agreeing to farm only sterile fish, Cooke will also need to prescreen any fish destined for net pens in Washington waters to ensure that they are free of disease. Cooke submitted a five-year Marine Aquaculture Permit application to WDFW in January 2019, and a SEPA Environmental Checklist with supporting documents in July 2019. WDFW continues to work with its natural resource agency partners to provide oversight and ensure compliance with the terms of aquaculture permits and leases in Puget Sound. Cooke’s proposal would also be subject to additional regulatory review by WDFW’s sister state agencies before the proposed transition could take place. The public is asked to submit comments by Oct. 22, 2019. The determination, including ways to comment, and supporting documents can be found at: https://wdfw.wa.gov/licenses/environmental/sepa/open-comments. -WDFW-

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
Ski
><((((°>



Joined: 28 May 2005
Posts: 12797 | TRs | Pics
Location: tacoma
Ski
><((((°>
PostMon Oct 14, 2019 6:35 pm 
Monday October 14, 2019 15:51 PDT WDFW FISHING RULE CHANGE Yakima River fall salmon fishery to close Action: Closes the Yakima River to fishing for salmon. Effective date: Sunday, Oct. 20, 2019. Species affected: Salmon. Location: From the Hwy. 240 bridge in Richland (river mile 2.1) to the Grant Avenue Bridge in Prosser (river mile 47.0) approximately 1,000 feet downstream of Prosser Dam. Reason for action: Fall Chinook are returning in extremely low numbers to the Yakima River. This closure is necessary to meet conservation and hatchery broodstock collection needs for fall Chinook and coho in the Yakima River Basin. Additional information: Saturday, Oct. 19 will be the last day to fish for salmon in the Yakima River this fall. This year's return of fall Chinook to the Yakima River is expected to be the lowest return on record over the past 28 years. -WDFW- (* emphasis added *)

"I shall wear white flannel trousers, and walk upon the beach. I have heard the mermaids singing, each to each."
Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
MyFootHurts
Huge Member



Joined: 22 Nov 2011
Posts: 912 | TRs | Pics
Location: Kekistan
MyFootHurts
Huge Member
PostTue Oct 15, 2019 3:16 am 
This turned out be another big nothing. Some fish got out. That's it.

Back to top Reply to topic Reply with quote Send private message
   All times are GMT - 8 Hours
 Reply to topic
Forum Index > Public Lands Stewardship > 'Environmental Nightmare' After Thousands Of Atlantic Salmon Escape Fish Farm 08/24/17
  Happy Birthday speyguy, Bandanabraids!
Jump to:   
Search this topic:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum