This is disgusting salmon farming

floattuber_lee

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTbxOFcvC4U

This is vile and they want to put a super farm in galway bay? This is a hour long documentary on salmon farming in british columbia and the effects it has had. Spare the time to watch it, its worth it

Shady Tady

floattuber_lee wrote: »

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTbxOFcvC4U

This is vile and they want to put a super farm in galway bay? This is a hour long documentary on salmon farming in british columbia and the effects it has had. Spare the time to watch it, its worth it

Salmon farming has its place when it's done on the right scale! If there wasn't salmon farming could you imagine the price of salmon, the gang that took flatleys rhino horn would probaly be interested. I haven't watched the video because I don't buy one sided propaganda!

floattuber_lee

when its done in the right place yes it has a purpose. but the whole (just about every species) aquaculture industry is a joke, grinding fish into meal to feed other fish, its crazy. the above video may have an agenda but they interview the government officials who are hiding the truth. it shows the investigations that were carried out. if you dont want to watch it thats your choice but it will give you an insight and if you want to balance that with some pro salmon farming im sure there are docs out there for that.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

I never out any store by arguments on any ecological subject that use North American practice's to make their case. Likewise, I won't watch a propaganda film that does not make any attempt at a balanced discussion.

floattuber_lee

The cause of the problems in canada came from european fish we have the diseases discussed in the documentary here. If you want to bury your head in the sand thats fine. But when scientific fact and proof is put in front of you it normally makes sense to pay attention. yes the documentary is one sided but what it does show is what happens when a government puts money ahead of well being of an ecosystem. At the very least shows how they wont do due diligence and at least do an EIA before sanctioning the creation of these farms. Then it shows the length they will go to cover up the magnitude of the damage thy are doing.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

They, they, they. Who are they? The Irish government? Not in this film,their're not.

floattuber_lee

Obviously i wasn't talking about the Irish government. But were you aware the EU has had step in in the case of the galway bay farm because THEY (the irish government) were quite happy to go ahead with the proposal based on bad/incorrect science. why was the science bad? the person doing it had a vested interest that the farm went ahead. Norwegian scientist challenged the findings hence the reason the proposal is scrapped for the moment. All the documentary above is showing is what lengths governments will go to to cover up scientific work that might be pointing a finger at a money maker.

If you think for one second the Irish government is above such things then i'm afraid that is a very naive point of view. That farm in galway would be getting built right now had someone not questioned the data. No EIA done nothing, no looking at historical data of what has happened in other countries, just build it and hope for the best.

Instead of arguing this point why dont you watch it and if you think it is one sided propaganda crap fine. but not to watch it and then have an opinion of it? you cant have an informed opinion of it.

Zzippy

Shady Tady wrote: »

Salmon farming has its place when it's done on the right scale! If there wasn't salmon farming could you imagine the price of salmon, the gang that took flatleys rhino horn would probaly be interested. I haven't watched the video because I don't buy one sided propaganda!

And what is the right scale? You say you don't buy one sided propaganda, yet you feel qualified to state that salmon farming has it's place on the right scale - can you back this up with any facts? 25-27 years ago, when salmon farming was in it's infancy in this country, salmon farms were small-scale operations in bays around the Connemara coastline. Not huge mega-farms like the one proposed for Galway Bay now. Do you know what happened?

I'd like to know what you consider a suitable scale that salmon farming can take place and not have massive impacts on wild stocks?

Camilo Pitiful Streetlight wrote: »

I never out any store by arguments on any ecological subject that use North American practice's to make their case. Likewise, I won't watch a propaganda film that does not make any attempt at a balanced discussion.

The fish farming practices used in North America are exactly the same as those used in Ireland, Norway, Scotland, Chile, Tasmania and New Zealand. There are several multinational companies like Marine Harvest, which run salmon farms all over the world. Their standard operating practices are similar. The only differences are in legal compliance, where certain pesticides are illegal in certain countries and they must use other agents, or where some countries have higher standards re food hygiene or parasite loads.
If you don't want to watch a North American documentary, how about this RTE Primetime programme from 2003 (the same **** is still going on today): http://vimeo.com/51718073

Shady Tady

Zzippy wrote: »

And what is the right scale? You say you don't buy one sided propaganda, yet you feel qualified to state that salmon farming has it's place on the right scale - can you back this up with any facts? 25-27 years ago, when salmon farming was in it's infancy in this country, salmon farms were small-scale operations in bays around the Connemara coastline. Not huge mega-farms like the one proposed for Galway Bay now. Do you know what happened?

I'd like to know what you consider a suitable scale that salmon farming can take place and not have massive impacts on wild stocks?




The fish farming practices used in North America are exactly the same as those used in Ireland, Norway, Scotland, Chile, Tasmania and New Zealand. There are several multinational companies like Marine Harvest, which run salmon farms all over the world. Their standard operating practices are similar. The only differences are in legal compliance, where certain pesticides are illegal in certain countries and they must use other agents, or where some countries have higher standards re food hygiene or parasite loads.
If you don't want to watch a North American documentary, how about this RTE Primetime programme from 2003 (the same **** is still going on today): http://vimeo.com/51718073

I worked on some of the same farms you talk about 20 years ago and many are still in existance and on the same scale and run and staffed by many of the same people and they have provided great employment, I don't want a large scale farm as proposed in Galway bay and neither do many of the fish farmers but I'm not stupid enough to use that project as an example to stop all fish farms, I'm a keen angler and have anglings best interest at heart but this agenda led propaganda gives anglers a bad name and shows a high degree of ignorance on the topic!

floattuber_lee

i have worked in aquaculture not a fan at all! i dont think you can trade off good employment against the damage fish farms do. i believe in norway they are developing techniques to do on land fish farming, which with the technology today surely cant be impossible?

Zzippy

Shady Tady wrote: »

I worked on some of the same farms you talk about 20 years ago and many are still in existance and on the same scale and run and staffed by many of the same people and they have provided great employment, I don't want a large scale farm as proposed in Galway bay and neither do many of the fish farmers but I'm not stupid enough to use that project as an example to stop all fish farms, I'm a keen angler and have anglings best interest at heart but this agenda led propaganda gives anglers a bad name and shows a high degree of ignorance on the topic!

Your point ignores the environmental damage caused by those farms. Is it ok to wipe out local sea trout stocks for those few jobs? A lot of jobs in salmon farming are seasonal. What about all the seasonal jobs that were wiped out with the sea trout? The sea trout angling industry in Connemara provided revenue to fisheries, B&Bs, hotels, guesthouses, pubs, restaurants, ghillies, tackle shops. That revenue is all gone, because of salmon farms. You talk about jobs, but its not job creation, its job displacement.

Shady Tady

Zzippy wrote: »

Your point ignores the environmental damage caused by those farms. Is it ok to wipe out local sea trout stocks for those few jobs? A lot of jobs in salmon farming are seasonal. What about all the seasonal jobs that were wiped out with the sea trout? The sea trout angling industry in Connemara provided revenue to fisheries, B&Bs, hotels, guesthouses, pubs, restaurants, ghillies, tackle shops. That revenue is all gone, because of salmon farms. You talk about jobs, but its not job creation, its job displacement.

I disagree

danbrosnan

Shady Tady wrote: »

Salmon farming has its place when it's done on the right scale! If there wasn't salmon farming could you imagine the price of salmon, the gang that took flatleys rhino horn would probaly be interested. I haven't watched the video because I don't buy one sided propaganda!

I'm sorry salmon farming does not belong in Ireland because of the importance on salmon angling and the fact that our salmon literally hang in the balance...

I do agree that salmon farming is good in the sense that it keeps the price of salmon down but the sad reality is, I would not trust the irish government and the public service in providing proper salmon farms...

Leave it up to the Norwegians who have been farming salmon for years and provide a big percentage of the farmed salmon to Europe...

Also common sense shows us that areas in Ireland where there is salmon farms, sea trout levels have collapsed... There is no other logical reason... Ask the owners of the Delphi lodge and they will tell you..

danbrosnan

Shady Tady wrote: »

I disagree

What do you disagree with??

Shady Tady

danbrosnan wrote: »

What do you disagree with??

What do you think?

rpmcmurphy

The people who would welcome salmon farming for the creation , or as one excellent poster described it, displacement of jobs are the very people who would welcome fracking in this country despite the untold damage it may cause in the face of damning evidence in other less environmentally conscious countries. I am currently unemployed, seeking work and studying for the past 6 years. I would rather never hold another job again if that employment was provided on the back of anything that caused untold damage to the environment. The damage to sea trout stocks in the west are a great loss to a resource that itself created employment and brought joy to many. I told you so would be cold comfort were it to be repeated.

Snowc

No further replies from Srameen .... once he seen everybody disagreed with him he no longer post but if he thought someone agreed with him he wouldn't stop posting :rolleyes:

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Well actually....I watched the entire piece last night and I do consider it a piece of pure propaganda. It is without doubt an unbalanced piece therefore it loses credibility in my mind.

That said. I have never stated that I favour salmon farming. I just like an informed discussion and if you read what I posted that is what I said.

Shady Tady

rpmcmurphy wrote: »

The people who would welcome salmon farming for the creation , or as one excellent poster described it, displacement of jobs are the very people who would welcome fracking in this country despite the untold damage it may cause in the face of damning evidence in other less environmentally conscious countries. I am currently unemployed, seeking work and studying for the past 6 years. I would rather never hold another job again if that employment was provided on the back of anything that caused untold damage to the environment. The damage to sea trout stocks in the west are a great loss to a resource that itself created employment and brought joy to many. I told you so would be cold comfort were it to be repeated.

So it follows that I now agree with fracking, great arguement! Are you against turf cutting?

rpmcmurphy

as it happens I am. Ecological damage to important Eu designated habitats in the name of heritage is something i would immediately distance myself from. Laws should be upheld not broken when it suits.

Shady Tady

rpmcmurphy wrote: »

as it happens I am. Ecological damage to important Eu designated habitats in the name of heritage is something i would immediately distance myself from. Laws should be upheld not broken when it suits.

What line of work are you in?

rpmcmurphy

Shady Tady wrote: »

What line of work are you in?

I don't see how that is relevant to the discussion, however if you read my posts I may have already answered that question.

SeaFields

Mod Note Leave out the personal stuff. There's no need for it. Keep the thread on topic and attack the post, not the poster.

Zzippy

Shady Tady wrote: »

I disagree

Care to elaborate on what exactly you disagree with, and why? Was something I wrote not true?

floattuber_lee

Camilo Pitiful Streetlight wrote: »

Well actually....I watched the entire piece last night and I do consider it a piece of pure propaganda. It is without doubt an unbalanced piece therefore it loses credibility in my mind.

That said. I have never stated that I favour salmon farming. I just like an informed discussion and if you read what I posted that is what I said.

So are you disputing the scientific data found? do you believe it was made up? or do you believe that the government is not trying to cover it up? or all of the above?

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

floattuber_lee wrote: »

So are you disputing the scientific data found? do you believe it was made up? or do you believe that the government is not trying to cover it up? or all of the above?

I know better than to engage in an online discussion on a topic like this with people who have very set and immovable opinions on this. And I won't be dragged into defending one outlook or the other. I believe there are ways to do things correctly and salmon farming is one of those things. I have spent too many years on investigations, surveys and research concerning wildlife to flatly accept what in this case is a blatantly onsided propaganda piece. The data supplied is probably correct within the restraints it was presented in. The government concerned is not our government so is irrelevant to me to be honest. Nothing was made up but it seemed obvious that it was both selective and not relevant in many ways to the Irish situation.
As I already stated, I'm not advocating large scale salmon farming by any means. I am simply not happy with that particular film being a fair assessment of all sides of the argument. Please don't take this as an attack as it is not. If you want to base all study of the subject on that film then fair enough but please allow me the discretion to believe there is more to be seen and heard on the subject.

floattuber_lee

Camilo Pitiful Streetlight wrote: »

I know better than to engage in an online discussion on a topic like this with people who have very set and immovable opinions on this. And I won't be dragged into defending one outlook or the other. I believe there are ways to do things correctly and salmon farming is one of those things. I have spent too many years on investigations, surveys and research concerning wildlife to flatly accept what in this case is a blatantly onsided propaganda piece. The data supplied is probably correct within the restraints it was presented in. The government concerned is not our government so is irrelevant to me to be honest. Nothing was made up but it seemed obvious that it was both selective and not relevant in many ways to the Irish situation.
As I already stated, I'm not advocating large scale salmon farming by any means. I am simply not happy with that particular film being a fair assessment of all sides of the argument. Please don't take this as an attack as it is not. If you want to base all study of the subject on that film then fair enough but please allow me the discretion to believe there is more to be seen and heard on the subject.

I wouldnt take it as an attack i was merely curious as to whether you were just dismissing everything out of hand as purely propaganda. i think the evidence fairly compelling. If you do a search of online scientific journals there is a lot evidence. You say this is one sided could you point me in the direction of the other side of the argument. i would love to read what the 'pro aquaculture' people are saying.

I wasn't saying the film was a fair assessment of all sides of the argument. what i was saying is this (meaning the situation in canada) vile salmon farming. But it would be foolish not too look at cases like this and think 'this will never happen to us'.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

I'm not standing over any of this but most of what I have is in hard copy. This site has some interesting links. Not all are appropriate to the Irish situation but you may see something of interest. As I said I don't endorse any of the opinions expressed but it might give another angle.
I'm sure there are many more online sources but this just comes to mind first. It has been a while since I read any of this so I forget what all it holds.
http://salmonfarmscience.com/library/

Zzippy

Camilo Pitiful Streetlight wrote: »

I'm not standing over any of this but most of what I have is in hard copy. This site has some interesting links. Not all are appropriate to the Irish situation but you may see something of interest. As I said I don't endorse any of the opinions expressed but it might give another angle.
I'm sure there are many more online sources but this just comes to mind first. It has been a while since I read any of this so I forget what all it holds.
http://salmonfarmscience.com/library/

And the important quote on that site is "We are unashamedly pro-aquaculture.". Hardly a balanced representation of the science either.

I prefer to read the actual science myself, as in the scientific papers published in peer-reviewed literature. I also look at the journals the papers are published in and their impact ratings, as this is important to note re the degree of rigour applied to peer review, and the esteem in which papers published in those journals are held relative to other journals. An impact rating of 1.2-2.5 is considered quite influential.

Just on the impact of parasites, namely sea lice, from salmon farms and their impact on wild stocks, the vast majority of the literature states unequivocally that there is a large impact. Most of these papers are funded by government, and are published in relatively influential journals. One was published in Nature, which is in the top 2 journals in the world in terms of impact (>32 impact rating!).

There are a very few papers which find no impact, most of which are funded by the salmon farming industry, or published by researchers with strong links to the industry, and mostly published in relatively unimportant journals. One recent paper by our own Marine Institute was published in a pay-to-publish journal with an impact rating of 0.19, which is, quite frankly, laughable.

The science, therefore, is quite clear to anyone with scientific training and the ability to read and interpret scientific research. But you will find that pro-salmon farming lobbyists, including our own BIM executives, are quite happy to disregard science, ignore research that doesn't suit their agenda, and selectively quote research that does.

ytpe2r5bxkn0c1

Zzippy wrote: »

And the important quote on that site is "We are unashamedly pro-aquaculture.". Hardly a balanced representation of the science either.

I prefer to read the actual science myself, as in the scientific papers published in peer-reviewed literature. I also look at the journals the papers are published in and their impact ratings, as this is important to note re the degree of rigour applied to peer review, and the esteem in which papers published in those journals are held relative to other journals. An impact rating of 1.2-2.5 is considered quite influential.


The science, therefore, is quite clear to anyone with scientific training and the ability to read and interpret scientific research. ...

Again, I agree with you. Someone asked for other research and II, with reservation, gave that link as all my documents are on hard copy or intranet and not available publicly online.

I agree wholeheartedly that the actual story is clear if you review all the research. But what is being missed is that this was a thread on a particular piece of film which was being extrapolated, merged, overlain, whatever term you wish, onto the Irish situation and that was just simply wrong. It covered a different species, different ocean conditions, and different legislation by a different government. That is the only objection I have on the thread. The case against salmon farming is clear and strong and will be better served by presenting it in a fair and balanced manner. I hope I have gone somewhere towards explaining my perhaps semantic reservations on the film in the OP.

floattuber_lee

Camilo Pitiful Streetlight wrote: »

Again, I agree with you. Someone asked for other research and II, with reservation, gave that link as all my documents are on hard copy or intranet and not available publicly online.

I agree wholeheartedly that the actual story is clear if you review all the research. But what is being missed is that this was a thread on a particular piece of film which was being extrapolated, merged, overlain, whatever term you wish, onto the Irish situation and that was just simply wrong. It covered a different species, different ocean conditions, and different legislation by a different government. That is the only objection I have on the thread. The case against salmon farming is clear and strong and will be better served by presenting it in a fair and balanced manner. I hope I have gone somewhere towards explaining my perhaps semantic reservations on the film in the OP.

The species affected may have been a different species but the causing factor was from atlantic salmon which had been shipped from european countries. Again i was using the film to point out how governments can hide and bully people into not publishing data that should be out there. I wasnt suggesting this will happen in ireland only that it could. The reason joe blogs public isnt informed of exactly what goes on in farms is the lack on information there for them to access. The cry from the government is increased revenue and jobs for the west, which sounds great. But they never point out the cost to the environment those jobs will cause.