New World News and Informtion Data Base on Salmon Resources

Data Base:
Drastic changes are beginning to take place to the salmon
stocks due to various human interfrerences with Nature

| Japanese version | Russian version | Chinese version | back to the previous page |

How to Use This Data Base:
  1. The information contained in this data base are provided by those around the world who are concerned over what's happening to the salmon stocks of the Northern Pacific region.
  2. All articles are going to be made available in various languages we time goes by, and the readers are welcome to quote from them as long as the original news sources are clearly mentioned.
If any reader has access to important information contained in publications in his or her language and not well known in other countries, please feel free to send them to our Clearinghouse Secretariat by e-mail or fax.

[Important News and Events during January, 2000]

(1) Fish farming expansion in Louisiana, Chile, and Norway -- Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000
(2) Salmon Expos from Salon.com Magazine -- Fri, 7 Jan 2000
(3) Fish Farming News from Around the World -- Wed, 12 Jan 2000
(4) Scottish Government Guidance Downplays Environmental Threats -- Thu, 13 Jan 2000
(5) Report concludes that recovery of (Pacific) salmon runs is an investment in long-term economic health -- Mon, 17 Jan 2000
(6) Salmon farming overview for 1999 -- Mon, 17 Jan 2000
(7) Aquaculture news and info. from around the world -- Fri, 21 Jan 2000
(8) Leaked DFO report: farmed fish hurting wild Atl. salmon populations -- Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000
(9) The Ocean Project: Update on activities -- Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000

[Important News and Events during February, 2000]

(1) Maine salmon update -- Tue, 1 Feb 2000
(2) News coverage in Maine of Atlantic salmon issues -- Tue, 1 Feb 2000
(3) Do escaped farm salmon jeopardize native populations? -- Mon, 7 Feb 2000
(4) Fish farming news and information from around the world -- Tue, 15 Feb 2000
(5) CBS on genetically-altered salmon -- Thu, 17 Feb 2000
(6) Europe loosens curbs on animal drugs in the soil -- Thu, 17 Feb 2000
(7) Q's & A's about the regulation of transgenic animals/fish -- Fri, 18 Feb 2000
(8) Fish Farming News From Around the World -- Tue, 22 Feb 2000
(9) Vaccine Industry Report 2000 -- Wed, 23 Feb 2000
(10) Fish farming news and information from around the world - Mon, 28 Feb 2000

[Important News and Events during March, 2000]

(1) B.C. Salmon Farmers Association has reinforced its position against the use of transgenics -- Thu, 2 Mar 2000
(2) Some Marine Biotechnology Web Sites -- Thu, 2 Mar 2000
(3) FDA Request for Comments on Issue Related to New Animal Drugs -- Thu, 2 Mar 2000
(4) Sewage in urban runoff may spur growth of harmful algal blooms -- Fri, 3 Mar 2000
(5) Infectious Salmon Anemia (ISA) spreads -- Wed, 8 Mar 2000
(6) Infectious Salmon Anemia (ISA) spreads -- Wed, 8 Mar 2000
(7) Fish Farming News and Information From Around the World -- March 13, 2000
(8) Organic Certification Standards for Aquatic Animals -- Mon, 13 Mar 2000
(9) Aquaculture Outlook (for the US) -- Mon, 13 Mar 2000
(10) B.C. Salmon Farmers Association has reinforced its position against the use of transgenics -- Thu, 2 Mar 2000
(11) Australia not to appeal WTO decision on Canadian salmon -- Tue, 21 Mar 2000
(12) Aquaculture America 2000 panel: Perspectives on sustainability in aquaculture -- Wed, 29 Mar 2000
(13) National (US) Organic Aquaculture Workshop -- Wed, 29 Mar 2000
(14) NOAA Aquaculture Initiative -- Thu, 30 Mar 2000
(15) Federal financial assistance availability (including aquaculture) -- Thu, 30 Mar 2000

[Important News and Events during April, 2000]

(1) Fish Farming News and Information From Around the World -- Mon, 3 Apr 2000
(2) Top salmon expert in Maine resigns in protest -- Thu, 6 Apr 2000
(3) Imports of farmed salmon in ’90s sparked rise in U.S. consumption -- Fri, 7 Apr 2000
(4) Integrated Research, Education, and Extension Competitive Grants Program -- Tue, 11 Apr 2000
(5) CSREES Update - April 7, 2000 CSREES UPDATE
(6) Transgenic salmon farm in PEI seeks U.S. approval -- Tue, 11 Apr 2000
(7) Antitrust legislation introduced to offset market concentration -- Mon, 17 Apr 2000
(8) Meetings to Discuss Double-Crested Cormorant Management -- Mon, 17 Apr 2000
(9) almon, halibut certified "organic" -- Mon, 17 Apr 2000
(10) PERSPECTIVES ON SUSTAINABILITY IN AQUACULTURE - from Aquaculture America 2000 -- Mon, 24 Apr 2000
(11) U.S. Salmon Consumption Sets Record -- Mon, 24 Apr 2000
(12) Fresno Bee editorial on 'organic' salmon -- Tue, 25 Apr 2000
(13) Giant Genetically Altered Lobster -- Wed, 26 Apr 2000
(14) Environmental group to file Clean Water Act suit against salmon farms -- Thu, 27 Apr 2000

[Important News and Events during May, 2000]

(1) Bangkok Declaration and Strategy for Aquaculture Development Beyond 2000 -- Wed, 10 May 2000
(2) Marine netpen farming leads to infections with some unusual parasites -- Wed, 10 May 2000
(3) Maine debates future of its disappearing salmon -- Wed, 10 May 2000
(4) NPR/Talk of the Nation on FDA's proposals re: genetically modified organisms and 'super salmon' -- Mon, 15 May 2000
(5) Atlantic Salmon in Washington State: A Fish Management Perspective -- Tue, 16 May 2000
(6) Patented salmon?? -- Thu, 18 May 2000
(7) 'Rivers of death' for Atlantic salmon -- Wed, 24 May 2000
(8) Is Salmon Organic? Not Yet -- Wed, 24 May 2000
(9) Australian tuna farms -- Thu, 25 May 2000
(10) Cultured Atlantic Salmon Threaten Pacific Cousins - from latest issue of Conservation Biology -- Thu, 25 May 2000
(11) GM salmon in Norway pose cancer threat: fish inspector (from Agence France Presse) -- Fri, 26 May 2000
(12) Salmon farming news from UK -- Tue, 30 May 2000

[Important News and Events during June, 2000]

(1) On eating salmon... -- Fri, 2 Jun 2000
(2) Maine Fish-Farming Industry Faces Profitability Problems -- Mon, 5 Jun 2000
(3) Salmon farming's 30th birthday -- Thu, 8 Jun 2000
(4) The (Norwegian) hunt is on in the USA and Canada (for fish farm licenses) -- Thu, 8 Jun 2000
(5) Aquaculture expansion annoys fishermen in Ireland -- Thu, 8 Jun 2000
(6) Atlantic halibut project is underway in Chile -- Thu, 8 Jun 2000
(7) SEA System Press Release: Trial of SEA System in NB Interrupted for One Year -- Fri, 9 Jun 2000
(8) ASF and WWF: NASCO Action Insufficient to Save Salmon -- Fri, 9 Jun 2000
(9) Articles on Scotland's wild salmon crisis -- Wed, 14 Jun 2000
(10) 5,000 sea lions and seals have been *legally* killed by BC salmon farmers -- Thu, 15 Jun 2000
(11) `Ultimate' invader threatens Atlantic salmon in eastern Canada -- Fri, 16 Jun 2000
(12) Scottish Parliament launches enquiry into fish farming -- Fri, 16 Jun 2000
(13) BC salmon farms news -- Mon, 19 Jun 2000
(14) US EPA effluent guidelines plan -- Wed, 21 Jun 2000
(15) Natives say salmon farms threaten wild finfish and shellfish -- Wed, 21 Jun 2000
(16) Salmon taste-off -- Thu, 22 Jun 2000
(17) Cover story of Nature: Booming Fish Farming Industry Depleting World Fish Supplies -- Wed, 28 Jun 2000
(18) Justice Department (Canada) gives salmon farming company clean bill of health -- Thu, 29 Jun 2000

[Important News and Events during July, 2000]

(1) Maine aquaculture firm defies industry standard -- Mon, 3 Jul 2000 21:49:09 -0400
(2) Department of Commerce (US) Approves $10 Million Loan For Closed System Aquaculture Projects -- Tue, 11 Jul 2000 15:56:20 -0400
(3) The availability and use of chemotherapeutic sea lice control products (Contributions to Zoology) -- Tue, 18 Jul 2000
(4) Blue Hill Bay (Maine) group set to file lawsuit; EPA, aquaculture operation targeted -- Fri, 21 Jul 2000
(5) Conference on marine aquaculture and the environment -- Sun, 23 Jul 2000
(6) ISA found on Maine/NB border -- Sun, 23 Jul 2000
(7) Genetically engineered fish is one reason for protests -- Tue, 25 Jul 2000

[Important News and Events during August, 2000]

(1) Vancouver Sun editorial -- Mon, 7 Aug 2000
(2) Financial Times (London) on salmon farming: Halting sacrilege in the Highlands -- Mon, 7 Aug 2000
(3) Glasgow Herald: Organic salmon farming in Orkneys -- Mon, 7 Aug 2000
(4) US Dept. of Commerce: Nine Chilean producers 'dumped' salmon -- Wed, 9 Aug 2000
(5) Canada to invest $75 million over next 5 years on aquaculture -- Wed, 9 Aug 2000
(6) Organic Aquaculture Update -- Wed, 9 Aug 2000
(7) Fish Label Fought: Critics Resist 'Organic' Tag -- Wed, 9 Aug 2000
(8) Certified Organic Wild Fish: The Next Generation of Standards -- Wed, 9 Aug 2000
(9) Russian Fish Farms to Raise 600 Mllion Salmon Fry -- Thu, 10 Aug 2000
(10) Canadian aquaculture 1999 sales up by 5% -- Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:41:04 -0400
(11) US FDA Approval for Cyanotech's NatuRose (color additive for farmed salmonids) -- Thu, 24 Aug 2000 13:49:42 -0400
(12) NMFS workshops on offshore aquaculture to be held -- Thu, 24 Aug 2000 14:07:22 -0400
(13) Fw: NMFS Workshops -- Fri, 25 Aug 2000
(14) Fish escapees said to feed in wild -- Mon, 28 Aug 2000
(15) Escaped salmon show up in Alaska -- Mon, 28 Aug 2000
(16) Aquaculture industry in Mass. gets state aid -- Mon, 28 Aug 2000
(17) New web page for the DOC/NOAA Aquaculture Program -- Tue, 29 Aug 2000
(18) Environmental think-tank criticizes Chilean salmon farming industry development -- Tue, 29 Aug 2000
(19) Signficant interest in cod farming in Norway -- Wed, 30 Aug 2000

[Important News and Events during September, 2000]

(1) Effects of lethal control at aquaculture facilities on populations of piscivorous birds (Wildlife Society Bulletin) -- Mon, 4 Sep 2000
(2) Washington Post: Maine Salmon Face Upstream Battle as Species; Returns Dwindle as Aquaculture Booms -- Mon, 4 Sep 2000
(3) MSC certification of the Alaska salmon fishery -- Tue, 5 Sep 2000
(4) WWF Scotland-commissioned report: Scotland's Secret-Aquaculture, nutrient pollution eutrophication and toxic blooms -- Mon, 18 Sep 2000

[Important News and Events during October, 2000]

(1) Seafood demand can only be satisfied with aquaculture says scientist -- Date: Tue, 3 Oct 2000
(2) Fish farming may soon overtake cattle ranching as a food source (from Worldwatch) -- Tue, 3 Oct 2000
(3) Scottish salmon farming revolution that has left the seas awash with toxic chemicals (The Independent/London) -- Wed, 4 Oct 2000
(4) Turbot farming to increase -- Thu, 5 Oct 2000
(5) B.C. salmon farmers invest $9.7 million to develop> green technologies -- Thu, 5 Oct 2000
(6) Greens wary of new fish farm rules (Gofish.com) -- Thu, 5 Oct 2000
(7) Latest European aquaculture statistics -- Fri, 6 Oct 2000
(8) tuna farming news -- Fri, 6 Oct 2000
(9) Agrigate: website from the Universities of Melbourne, Adelaide, and Queensland -- Tue, 10 Oct 2000
(10) organic salmon -- Tue, 10 Oct 2000
(11) AK Seafood Marketing Institute: It's time to attack farm salmon -- Wed, 11 Oct 2000
(12) Antimicrobial Resistance: An Ecological Perspective -- Wed, 11 Oct 2000




(1) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Fish farming expansion in Louisiana, Chile, and Norway

Date: Mon, 3 Jan 2000

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "Zdravka Tzankova" , "FishFarmReview"

The following three stories come from FIS.

* Researchers at Louisiana State University hope to establish the aquaculture industry along the state´s coast in the hope of creating jobs to replace the near-shore oil industry * Chile´s salmon exports are expected to grow by nearly 25% in 2000 * Analysis show that it is possible to produce 2.5 billion tons of salmon in Norway (today Norway produces close to 400,000 tons of salmon).

**SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse**
Bill Mott, Director
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
phone: 401/272-8822
fax: 401/272-8877
email: bmott@seaweb.org
www.seaweb.org/campaigns/sac

Researchers boost aquaculture industry

(US, Monday, January 03, 2000)

Researchers at Louisiana State University hope to establish the aquaculture industry along the state´s coast in the hope of creating jobs to replace the near-shore oil industry and say the 25 to 30-pound redfish swimming in a fibreglass tank at the LSU could provide the answer.

Researchers hope to speed up the spawning process by controlling water temperature and lighting in a former campus dining service food cooler. The redfish are taken through a full year of seasons in just four months.

It is thought that by controlling spawning, a business could "grow" fish to meet a year-round market, although researchers still have to overcome the problems of getting the fingerlings to grow in tanks once successful egg collection has taken place.

Louisiana´s salty coastal waters allow a wider variety of fish to be farmed and researchers are considering various species for aquaculture, including lemon fish and pompano.

The state´s aquaculture industry already grows crawfish, oysters, soft-shell crab, catfish and alligators. In the future, commercial programmes for red drum, snapper and shrimp will be set up.

By Karen Myles

-----------------------

Producers expect further growth of salmon exports in 2000

(CHILE, Friday, December 31, 1999)

Next year, Chile´s salmon exports are expected to grow by nearly 25% to US$1,000, with shipments increasing from the present 160,000 to some 180,000-190,000 tonnes, according to estimates from the Salmon and Trout Farmers´ Association.

Up to October, Chile´s salmon exports realised US$607.7 million - an increase of 7,45% on the same period of 1998. However, the volume exported was 23.2% lower than that of the previous year.

The president of the Association, Rodrigo Infante, attributed the net growth of the sector´s exports to a larger participation of value added products. He said: "While in 1991 value added products represented just 5% of the salmon exports, this percentage reached 52% in 1998. For this year, we expect these products to account for 55-56% of the total, and to exceed 60% in 2000." According to Infante, this trend responds to the growing demand for products that are almost ready to consume.

Japan is expected to continue being Chile´s top salmon buyer in 2000, considering that most of the increase of this year´s exports resulted from the 26.7% rise in the sales to that country, which amounted to US$325.4 million. This growth offset the 25% drop in volume to 64,000 tonnes.

For next year, the Association also expects an increase in the sales to the U.S. and Latin America, in spite of the drops registered in October, both in terms of value and volume.

Infante said that during January-October, exports of Atlantic salmon were 4.3% up on the same period of 1998 and amounted to US$285.2 million, while sales of coho salmon grew by 40% to US$188 million.

By FIS Latin America

-------------------------------

Fish farming of the future

(NORWAY, Wednesday, December 22, 1999)

Norway already extracts as much fish as possible from the sea, if not even more than it should. On a global level, however, Norway only takes about 2.7 to 3.0 tons of the 100-ton yearly fisheries.

In the future, it will be possible to make money from industry-waste as well as from resources lower down the system, such as plankton, Dagens Naeringliv reports.

Today, salmon is Norway´s most important "commercial animal". This will probably also be the case in the future. Analysis show that it is possible to produce 2.5 billion tons of salmon in Norway, thanks to the long coast line. Today Norway produces close to 400,000 tons of salmon.

But in order to increase the production to such a level, there are a number of challenges that need to be overcome.

Between 15 and 20 different parties are fighting for their share of Norway´s 57,000 kilometre-long coast line. One of the conflicts is between fish farmers and anglers. The latter wants to keep around 50 rivers and nine coast lines free from fish farming. Other groups, who demand their rights to the sea, include the tourist industry, fish farming of other species than salmon and trout and industries dedicated to the development of alternative forms of energy.

By FIS Scandinavia


(2) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Salmon Expos from Salon.com Magazine

Date: Fri, 7 Jan 2000 09:40:32 -0500

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmReview"

CC: "Zdravka Tzankova" , "James Semple" , "Allan Berry"

A new twist to the Maine salmon saga...

[The following article comes thanks to Dwayne Shaw and Lisa Dropkin.]

Published by an online magazine, Salon.com. > http://www.salon.com./news/feature/2000/01/05/salmon/index.html.

Illegal, or politics as usual? Environmentalists say Bruce Babbitt broke the law and sacrificed the Atlantic salmon to protect the Endangered Species Act

- - - - - - - - - - - -

By Susan Zakin

Jan. 5, 2000 | A lawsuit to force the federal government to add the Atlantic salmon to the endangered species list has exposed a secret deal between Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt and Defense Secretary William Cohen. Cohen and Babbitt aren't talking, citing litigation, but at least one staff member called it politics as usual. The nation's top environmental lawyers call it illegal.

Internal agency memos show that at the height of the Republican Congress' Contract With America fever in early 1995, Cohen, then a moderate Republican senator from Maine, sent a letter to Babbitt complaining about the way a U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service proposal to list the Atlantic salmon as an endangered species would affect Maine industries. In it, Cohen bluntly threatened to join his party's attempts to gut the Endangered Species Act if the proposal wasn't dropped.

Within the next few weeks, agency memos reveal, Babbitt put the brakes on listing the fish, over vehement protests by federal scientists. Today, the nation's top environmental attorneys say that Babbitt's action violated the law. The Endangered Species Act clearly mandates that science should be the only criteria for listing species. "Babbitt broke the law, period," says Mark Hughes, executive director of Earthlaw, a Boulder, Colo., environmental law firm.

The Atlantic salmon could become a national political issue, since last month Babbitt once again proposed adding the salmon, which spawns in Maine rivers, to the endangered list. Maine's governor, Angus King, a vocal opponent of listing, is putting the heat on Vice President Al Gore, who is facing a tough primary challenge from former Sen. Bill Bradley in neighboring New Hampshire. King wants Gore to block the listing, which he says would protect the fish by banning fish farming and agricultural irrigation in Maine rivers and throwing thousands out of work. But the current dust-up ignores the long history of compromises already made on protecting the salmon.

Spokesmen for both Babbitt and Cohen declined comment on the 1995 deliberations about the salmon, citing ongoing litigation. The incriminating documents surfaced recently in lawsuits brought by Defenders of Wildlife, Trout Unlimited and the Atlantic Salmon Federation to force the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service to list the salmon on an emergency basis.

The number of endangered species lawsuits against the federal government has quadrupled over the past five years, exposing a pattern of avoidance and delay that casts doubt on the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service's ability to do its job in the face of unrelenting pressure -- some would call it bullying -- from a hostile Congress. Some conservationists charge that the agency doesn't realize that the political climate has changed. They think the Clinton administration's mistaken belief that it's necessary to gut the law in order to save it has resulted in a pattern of questionable, often illegal deal-making.

While the case of the Atlantic salmon may be typical of the administration's legally questionable dealings on endangered species, this is the first time anyone has come up with a smoking gun, much less one that bears the fingerprints of two Cabinet officials.

At the time Europeans settled in New England, there were about a million salmon there. Over the next three centuries, the region's forests were razed, thousands of dams were built, fishing became industrialized and salmon, gradually, disappeared. Today, only 200-300 New England salmon still contain enough unique genetic characteristics, which are linked to their natal streams, to be considered wild.

So the federal government began moving to include the Atlantic salmon on the Endangered Species list. But on Feb. 8, 1995, Cohen, then a senator from Maine, sent a letter to Babbitt stating that protecting the state's 75 or so remaining adult wild salmon would "have a serious impact on Maine's agriculture, forest products, and aquaculture industries."

He added ominously: "The disposition of this [Atlantic salmon] petition will greatly affect my views regarding changes to the Endangered Species Act that might be warranted."

Interoffice memos and e-mails over the next few weeks reveal that Babbitt responded quickly. A March 1, 1995, e-mail from Chris Mantzaris of the National Marine Fisheries Service, which shares jurisdiction over the salmon with the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, stated that "Senator Cohen sent a letter to Brown [Ron Brown, who headed the Department of Commerce, which includes the National Marine Fisheries Service] and Babbitt opposing a listing actions. Babbitt took this very seriously and has requested that the federal register notice be redrafted to state that the petitioned action is not warranted."

The biologist's e-mail added, "The Region does not agree and neither do staff level people in HQ." These words were echoed in a blistering memo from another NMFS biologist, John Kocik. The March 3, 1995, memo stated: "It is my opinion that the proposed changes compromise the intent of the Act and the integrity of the science."

Kocik was right, according to the nation's top environmental lawyers. "It was a constitutional moment," says Zygmunt Plater, a legendary Boston College law professor who worked on the nation's first major ESA case, the 1970s effort to stop the Tellico Dam to protect the snail darter. Plater believes the early days of the Contract With America signaled a historic power shift from government to industry, with lobbyists writing legislation and the U.S. House of Representatives "essentially repealing a series of major statutes that regulate the marketplace."

"The 104th Congress put tremendous pressure on people like Babbitt. When you have one branch of the federal government asserting primary power, with the Reagan and Nixon appointees on the Supreme Court deferring to it, it is a major shift. The multimillion-dollar paper, timber and other industry groups that are dedicated to destroying the Endangered Species Act really seemed to hold sway at that time. They represent far more money than the federal government has for endangered species law enforcement. The agencies were cowering in fear, literally paralyzed with fear."

In this charged atmosphere, could Babbitt have done anything differently? Maybe, maybe not. But Babbitt's continuing penchant for back-room deals may leave him with an uncertain legacy at Interior. The former Arizona governor once told me, "Compromise isn't the answer some of the time; it's the answer all the time."

And compromise was certainly the approach taken in Maine. After receiving Cohen's letter, Babbitt ordered that the salmon be placed in a special category called a "candidate species," a kind of bureaucratic limbo for threatened and endangered species. Several months later, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service did renew its proposal to list the species, but this time it was downgraded to threatened, a category providing less protection.

Shortly afterward, Congress placed an 18-month moratorium on new listing. After the moratorium was lifted, the federal proposal to list the salmon was withdrawn completely, in favor of letting the state of Maine carry out its own plan for saving the fish, which would have been prohibited under the more stringent endangered listing originally proposed.

About a year ago, not long after a similar arrangement in Oregon was thrown out by a federal judge, Maine's plan flunked a review by federal authorities.

Now it appears that Maine's wild salmon are in even more trouble, as new diseases threaten to reach epidemic proportions without sufficient controls on aquaculture. The industry's reliance on hybrid fish that are partly descended from farmed European salmon -- a practice banned in Canada, which has its own worries about native fish -- is also causing alarm because of the possibility that escapees will taint the dwindling native gene pool. Catch and release fishing for sea-run Atlantic salmon was banned only last week to ensure greater protection for the fish.

On Nov. 18, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service once again proposed listing the Atlantic salmon as endangered, over the loud protests of Maine Gov. Angus King, Republican Sen. Olympia Snowe and the state's powerful aquaculture interests. Ironically, the aquaculture industry may have been hurt most by the four-year delay, which has allowed it to up its investment in non-native strains of salmon that could be banned once the ESA takes effect.

Conservationists like Mike Senatore of Defenders of Wildlife say that this is a perfect example of how the Clinton administration's insistence on a win-win policy ends up in losers all around.

But even a federal judge won't be able to answer the question haunting the whole debate: If New England's wild Atlantic salmon die out, will we ever know if the politically inspired delay pushed them over the edge?

Scientifically, it's a tough call. But the legal questions are easier to answer. Did Babbitt break the law? Hughes, Plater and a raft of other environmental lawyers contacted for this article all say yes.

What about Cohen? Given the desperate politics of the time, shouldn't blame be laid at his doorstep rather than Babbitt's? David Carle, the New Hampshire environmentalist who unearthed Cohen's letter prior to the lawsuit, believes the senator-turned-defense secretary's war on the pink fish was not only unethical but possibly illegal. After all, Carle notes, hasn't Cohen, a Vietnam veteran, sworn -- at least twice, if not three times -- to uphold the law of the land?

"It's an interesting question," muses Mark Hughes of Earthlaw. "If this were a white-collar criminal trial, Cohen's letter would certainly be enough to qualify as a threat. But legality depends on context. So I'd say it's reprehensible and, not only that, it's stupid. But not necessarily illegal."

salon.com | Jan. 5, 2000

About the writer

Susan Zakin is the author of "Coyotes and Town Dogs: Earth First! and the Environmental Movement" (Penguin 1995) and a former political columnist for Sports Afield magazine.


(3) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Fish Farming News from Around the World

Date: Wed, 12 Jan 2000

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmReview"

These stories follow:

- Halibut farming is a success in Iceland
- Three stories on Norway:
-Intensified marketing of Norwegian farmed salmon in the USA - "Dawn of a new era" for fish farming
- Fish-farming is a modern-day fairy tale
- Electronically tagged salmon
- Australian imports of salmon in jeopardy?
- Scientists develop farming techniques for marine fish in Brazil esp.
snapper and grouper

News from Iceland from FIS:

Halibut farming is a success

ICELAND

Friday, January 07, 2000, 03:30 (GMT + 9)

Halibut farming is proving to be a very successful industry in Iceland with some firms increasing capacity, including Icelandic firm Fiskeldi Eyjafjardur (Fiskey), which will take in new investors and inject ISK 200 million into the company, reports Fiskaren.

Fiskey claims to be producing 40% of the world´s production of halibut fingerlings. Their goal is to control 50% by the end of next year. In addition, the company will harvest 100 tonnes of halibut, or about 25% of global output of farmed halibut. Halibut production could rise to 220 tonnes by the end of year 2001, the firm´s managing director Mr. Ólafur Halldórsson told Fiskaren.

The largest shareholder in the company is the Icelandic Institute of Marine Research, which controls 30.5%. Thereafter follows the large fishing and seafood company Samherji, which controls 10.9% and Útgerdarfélag Akureyringa with 9.3%.

Until now, most of the developments in halibut farming have occurred in Norway, where Stolt Sea Farm has been the leader both in terms of production volume and technological development. But the development as been hampered by problems in producing enough fingerlings and also by most other halibut projects in Norway being relatively small and without capital. Also, Norwegian companies like Procean AS have been in the forefront of developing grow out farms for halibut. But with the success of Iceland, Norway could stiff competition and see its position as the world´s number one producer threatened.

By Terje Engø

-----------------------------------------------

News from Norway from IntraFish:

Intensified marketing in the USA

Publisert: 12.01.2000 11:17

"Over the next three-year period, marketing of Norwegian salmon and trout will be intensified on growth markets outside the EU", said Jack Robert Møller of the Norwegian Seafood Export Council to the newspaper Adresseavisen.

"Primarily, this means that more money will be targeted on the USA and Japan", he said. A total of 600 million Norwegian kroner spread over three years will be spent on the marketing of salmon and trout.

--------------------------------------------------------------

"Dawn of a new era" Publisert: 10.01.2000 07:00

"Today no one has objections to the marine farming business being called an industry. Great changes are in store, and the main challenge will be whether we are equally proficient as industrialists as we have been as pioneers and primary producers".

This was voiced by Chairman Tarald Sivertsen of the Norwegian Fish Farmers' Association, NFFA, in a New Year's interview with IntraFish. "If aquaculture is to become a great and significant industry for Coastal Norway, its actual wealth generation of its own activities must increase. This means more preparation and further processing, which in turn calls for more capital and manpower", he said.

Capital

"It is now we are seeing the dawn of a new era", said Sivertsen. He believes that the marine farming industry can be instrumental in creation of wealth; unsurpassed by anything witnessed by the coast since herring fishing in the previous century built towns along the entire length of Norway's coastline.

"Nonetheless, the industry must be allowed to consolidate, act on equal terms in the EU and that we receive the opportunity to develop new markets. The industry is solid enough to invest further, but it doesn't have enough equity yet. If the objectives of creating a replacement for oil are to be achieved in the future, then fish farm companies' earnings and equity must increase at the same time as we must appeal to the investor milieu", he said.

-----------------------------------------------

Fish-farming is a modern-day fairy tale Publisert: 11.01.2000 07:00

"Fish-farming is a modern-day fairy tale, while agriculture in Norway stands out as the ultimate loser in the projection for Norway's future".

This is expounded in ECON's new scenarios for Norway towards 2020, which were discussed yesterday at NHO's annual conference. The projection for the future has been prepared in co-operation with a cross-section group of 50-60 persons from the Norwegian community.

"The absolute greatest success in 20 years time will be the marine farming industry that has developed into an industrial fairy tale, and that so far has filled the vacuum left after oil. Yes, in 2020 Norway will be the actual dynamo in a global investment in aquaculture, and production value outside traditional fishing will have surged from 10 billion in 1998 to 130 billion. Agriculture remains as the great loser".

-------------------------------------------

Electronically tagged salmon Publisert: 12.01.2000 07:00

Seventh generation salmon are on the way in Aqua Gen's breeding programme. Selection for the new age group is based on electronically tagged parent fish.

"The seventh generation definitely represents a brand new development. Electronic tags provide positive identification", said Willy Merkesnes of Aqua Gen at Kyrksæterøra to the newspaper Adresseavisen. He maintains that the tagging represents a quantum leap in breeding research in so far as totally indisputable identification of the fish is established, at the same time that you can retain as many salmon families as you wish.

-----------------------------------------------------------

Australian imports of salmon in jeopardy? Publisert: 10.01.2000 07:00

The Australian National Anglers Lobby is trying to sign Australia's largest supermarkets to an accreditation agreement to only sell locally- produced raw salmon, reports the Mercury.

Such an agreement would have big consequences on any imports of Canadian or NZ salmon. National Anglers Association spokesman Harvey Taylor leaves Hobart tomorrow [TUES] to finalise an accreditation scheme with Coles, Woolworths, NSW and Queensland chain Franklins and independent wholesalers, which would commit the stores to sell only Australian- produced raw salmon.

"We will be starting a national advertising campaign to promote the stores that only sell local raw salmon. The next step in the process is to include hotels and restaurants in the accreditation campaign." He said two shipments of New Zealand raw salmon had arrived in Sydney at the end of last year and he believed the first shipment from Canada was imminent.

-------------------------------------------------------

>From FIS:

Scientists develop farming techniques for marine fish

BRAZIL Monday, January 10, 2000, 14:30 (GMT + 9)

During the last few years, interest in developing the culture of tropical marine fish, particularly grouper (Epinephelus spp) and snapper (Lutjanus spp) has grown. In some Asian countries, production of these species exceeds 12,000 tonnes per year, with international prices fluctuating between US$3 and US$6 per kilo for snapper and between US$10 and US$30 for grouper, according to a report issued in Panorama da Acuicultura.

Some Brazilian fish are being regarded as suitable species for commercial aquaculture, such as snapper, flounder (Paralichthys spp.), grouper and croaker (Scianidae).

Currently, several universities and research institutions are developing farming techniques in Brazil, including the University of Santa Catalina, the San Pablo Fisheries Institute and the universities of Rio Grande and Pernambuco. Studies are focused on Mugil spp., Centropomus spp. and Paralichthys spp. In addition, researches are studying the adaptability of Epinephelus and Lutjanus to captivity conditions. These two species are found to resist high population densities -up to 100-200 specimens per cubic metre - and common hatching techniques and they reach a commercial size of 400-500g in about a year. The time these fish need to reach sexual maturity is still unknown.

Scientists are trying to develop the most adequate feeding formulae for species hatched in floating cages. Also, they have been working on the reproduction of snapper in captivity, as they believe Lutjanus will probably be the first marine species suitable for hatching in cages in Brazil.

By FIS Latin America


(4) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Scottish Government Guidance Downplays Environmental Threats

Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 14:55:07 -0500

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "Zdravka Tzankova" , "Suzanne Vetromile"

FYI

----- Original Message -----

From: Don Staniford ENDS Report 299, December 1999

GUIDANCE ON FISH FARMS DOWNPLAYS ENVIRONMENTAL THREATS

Growing concerns over the impact of salmon farms on the marine environment are poorly reflected in recent planning guidance and advice issued by the Scottish Executive. Although the guidance recommends curbs on the industry's expansion, it does little to draw attention to problems such as the threat to wild salmon populations from parasites, eutrophication and the increasing frequency of algal blooms. Almost all of the UK's salmon farms are on the west coast of Scotland, the Western Isles and Shetland. The industry has grown rapidly in the last decade, with output more than doubling to 110,000 tonnes in 1998. Pressure for further expansion is continuing despite growing concern about the industry's impact on the environment. Planning decisions on fish farms are taken by the Crown Estate Commissioners, but local authorities will take over as soon as new legislation is passed by the Scottish Parliament. In the interim, they have a non-statutory role which in practice gives them substantial control over fish farm projects.

The Scottish Executive recently issued new guidance to local authorities on the location and environmental impacts of fish farms. One major recommendation is a presumption against new farms on the north and east coasts of Scotland. Although these areas are not at present under pressure, the move appears to be a recognition that expansion there might threaten salmon rivers such as the Spey, Tweed, Tay, Don and Dee. The remainder of Scotland has been divided into three categories indicating their suitability for further expansion. There are eleven "category 1" areas where new development or expansion is only acceptable in exceptional circumstances" - for example, "where it can be demonstrated conclusively...that the development will not have a signficant adverse effect on the environmental qualities of the area." Most of these sites are in the Western Isles.

There are over 50 "category 2" areas where the "prospects for future substantial developments are likely to be limited," although some expansion might be permitted "particularly where proposals will result in an overall reduction in environmental effect." The category includes areas which already house substantial fish farming operations or have particular scenic or wildlife conservation value. Areas in "category 3" have "better prospects of satisfying environmental requirements, although the detailed circumstances will always need to be examined carefully," the guidance says.

Professor David Mackay, Director of the Scottish Environment Protection Agency's north region, welcomed the guidance, which he sees as "an admission that the industry is not without its (environmental) problems." Professor Mackay has been outspoken in underlining exactly what these are. Speaking at a European aquaculture conference in Trondheim, Norway, this summer, he pointed to concerns over the toxic effects of theraputent and anti-fouling chemicals, habitat degradation, algal blooms and interference with wild fish populations. Few of these problems are reflected in the Scottish Executive's advice. Professor Mackay regards the increased pressure on wild populations from parasites such as sea lice from farms as one of the most important issues. But the guidance merely comments: "Fears have aLso been expressed about the transmission of disease and parasites from farmed to wild fish though this is potentially equally applicable in reverse."

In contrast, Professor Mackay believes that harm to wild fish from the increasing prevalence of parasites "should now be accepted as beyond reasonable doubt." He noted that salmon populations in rivers on Scotland's west coast - closest to fish farm developments have all but collapsed over the last 20 years. Although there have also been declines in other populations more remote from fish farms. these were generally much less severe. Some believed that the sea lice problem would disappear when farm infestations were reduced by medication. But Professor Mackay disagrees, contending that control would need to be far more stringent than the economic optimum in order to protect wild fish. "If near-elimination of sea lice in salmon farms is not practicable then separation from wild stocks by distance may be the only alternative," he said. "It seems likely...that location or expansion of fish farms near the migratory routes and feeding grounds of wild stocks will soon be severely curtailed if not altogether banned."

The Scottish Executive's advice also warns of the need for fish farm sites to be well flushed to avoid the build-up of nutrients and lessen the impact of toxic theraputents and anti-foulants. However, Professor Mackay suggests that farms could avoid anti-fouling chemicals altogether by using so-called "swim through" cages in which the nets are cleaned by exposure to the air. These should be recognised as best environmental practice and adopted by various accreditation schemes now being promoted by the industry, he said. A complete ban on the use of antifoulants on fish cages might be needed, he warned, if research showed that current practices are unsustainable.

Professor Mackay is also concerned over the possible disturbance and degradation of marine habitats by nutrient and toxin inputs from fish farms another issue not broached by the Scottish Executive. Marine salmon farming releases 10.000 tonnes of ammonia into the sea per year - equal to a quarter of the combined input from all Scottish rivers. Some scientists believe that such nutrient inputs have contributed to the increasing incidence of algal blooms (ENDS Report 295. p 12). The blooms can cause fish kills and threaten shellfish harvesting. The latter was a major concern in 1999, with much of the west coast closed for scallop harvesting following an unprecedented and widespread outbreak of amnesic shellfish poisoning - caused by the accumulation of algal toxins in the shellfish.

ENDS Bulletin

Ref: Policy guidance note: Locational guidelines for the authorisation of marine fish farms in Scottish waters. Advice note: Marine fish farming and the environment. Both on: http:/www.scotland.gov.uk/library2/doc06/mff-01.htm


(5) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Report concludes that recovery of (Pacific) salmon runs is an investment in long-term economic health

Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmReview"

CC: "Zdravka Tzankova" , "Suzanne Vetromile" , "James Semple" , "Allan Berry"

This information comes thanks to 'Fishlink Sublegals', an online publication of the Insititute for Fisheries Resources and the Pacific Coast Federation of Fishermen's Associations. Beyond its importance to the west coast, Mainers and others may find it useful in the upcoming Atlantic salmon/ESA discussions.

For full report, web address is given. I've pasted the executive summary below.

REPORT CONCLUDES THAT RECOVERY OF SALMON RUNS IS AN INVESTMENT IN LONG-TERM ECONOMIC HEALTH:

In a 5 January report to the Oregon Board of Forestry, ECONorthwest, a Eugene, Oregon economic consulting firm, found that the long-term benefits produced by recovering salmon populations outweigh the short-term economic gains produced by logging the fishes' habitat. The report, "Salmon, Timber and the Economy" was produced for the Institute for Fisheries Resources, Pacific Rivers Council, Oregon Trout, and the Audubon Society of Portland. For more information on this report, visit the Pacific Rivers Council's website at: http://www.pacrivers.org/Publications/timber.html.

Executive summary

Facing imminent loss of their wild salmon, Oregonians have decided the problem warrants extraordinary effort to solve. Americans, in polls and through their agent, the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), agree with them. At the forefront of efforts to solve the problem are proposals to restrict logging and related practices on private and state lands. In this report we examine these proposals and the potential economic consequences of implementing them.

WHY FOCUS ON LOGGING RESTRICTIONS?

Logging and related forest practices are an important, but not sole, cause of declining salmon populations-agricultural practices, urban development, fishing practices, and dams also are important. Private entities and the state own 56 percent of Oregon's timberland, about 9 million acres. Past timber production on these lands has degraded the habitat salmon need to survive by increasing sedimentation in streams, stream temperatures, and the incidence of harmful landslides. It also has destroyed spawning sites and created impediments to the movement of spawners upstream and juveniles downstream.

Furthermore, three recent science-based reviews have concluded that the state's current forest-practice regulations will not prevent further degradation, let alone reverse past degradations (IMST 1999; NMFS 1998; Pacific Rivers Council 1999). The reviews generally recommend restricting logging near streams and in landslide-prone areas, rehabilitating existing roads and changing the design of future roads, and protecting areas with the best salmon habitat that serve as refuges amid habitat desolation.

WHY FOCUS ON THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES?

The proposals to restrict logging and related activities on private and state forest lands have triggered considerable opposition, largely because many landowners believe the proposals would cause them to forgo substantial expected revenues from the production of timber. After NMFS issued its initial proposal, for example, the two organizations representing landowners complained the proposal would take 39 percent of the private timberland out of production at a cost of about $8,700 per acre, or $29 billion total (Oregon Small Woodlands Association and Oregon Forest Industries Council 1998).

Costs to landowners, however, are only part of the story. Rebuilding healthy salmon populations offers large benefits for the economy. The importance of looking at both the benefits and the costs was recognized by 78 economists, who recently sent a letter to the governors of the four Pacific states and the premier of British Columbia (Whitelaw et al. 1998), urging them to look beyond those who cast conservation as a salmon-vs.-economy contest by focusing solely on the costs of salmon conservation. This report takes the broader view recommended in the economists' letter.

WHAT ARE THE MAJOR POTENTIAL ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES?

As salmon-related restrictions generate costs and benefits for the economy, they also will have positive and negative impacts on jobs. These major effects will occur against the backdrop of several important issues.

Costs and Benefits

Recent studies indicate that implementing the logging and other restrictions needed to restore healthy salmon habitat on private and state forest lands would remove 15-45 percent of the lands from timber production. Though some landowners argue the proposals would cost landowners as much as $8,000 per acre, most studies conclude the costs would be 1-10 percent this level, i.e., $80-800 per acre. Even these estimates, however, fail to account for the opportunities available to landowners for mitigating the costs. These include conducting watershed analyses to determine where, exactly, the restrictions are warranted and where they are not. Absent such analyses, it is prudent for the agencies charged with restoring salmon populations to paint the restrictions with a broad brush.

Restricting logging would create numerous benefits. The most apparent is an increase in salmon populations, important to the commercial-fishing industry, recreationists, and those who treasure salmon's intrinsic value. In addition, logging reductions should yield cleaner streams, by reducing logging-related sediment. With past logging practices common in the western Cascades, for example, clearcutting one acre imposed $208 in flood-damage and other costs on downstream firms and households.

Other benefits are less direct but no less important. The cleaner streams, fewer clearcuts, and other environmental improvements accompanying logging reductions would enhance the profits of firms in the recreation and tourism industries. They also would improve the quality of life for those Oregonians who value such things and, when the improvement is enough to influence workers and households to locate in Oregon, it would increase the profits of firms that hire and sell goods and services to them.

Quantifying these and other benefits is devilishly hard. There is evidence, though, indicating that the benefits are commensurate with, or even exceed, the costs.

Studies of federal lands east of the Cascades, for example, found that recreational services account for about 90 percent of the total value of all services and commodities derived from these lands. Fishing is especially important. Timber accounts for only about 10 percent of the total, and this percentage is expected to fall.

Another useful comparison entails recognizing that salmon habitat acts like financial assets, generating a flow of economic benefits over time. Evidence from the past decade indicates that, if habitat improvements resulting from salmon-related logging restrictions generated one additional fish for the recreational fishery per year per acre for the foreseeable future, the asset value of the habitat would be about $2,800 per acre.

By comparison, the average timber-asset value of state and private land used for growing timber in Oregon is about $400 per acre in Western Oregon, and the average value of land plus standing timber is about $4,000 per acre. Values are less east of the Cascades.

Thus, if logging restrictions converted one acre of private or state land from producing timber to producing one salmon per year for the recreational fishery, the asset value of the new salmon habitat would be about seven times the forgone timber-asset value of the land, alone. The recreation-related, habitat-asset value would be about two-thirds the average value of the timber-asset value of the land plus the current stocking of timber. Furthermore, some foresters believe that the forgone timber-asset value could be reduced by half because, with appropriate forest-practice regulations, landowners could improve salmon habitat and produce some timber from some acres.

To weigh the costs and benefits fully, one would have to incorporate into the comparison other benefits, such as reductions in sediment-related damage and the intrinsic value of salmon. Surveys indicate, for example, that Oregon households, on average, are willing to pay $2.50ñ7.00 per month to protect or restore salmon. Applied to the 1.25 million Oregon households, the total is about $3-8.75 million per month. Some undetermined portion of this applies to salmon restoration in private and state forests.

Thus, instead of costing billions of dollars, as some have concluded by looking only at gross estimates of the effects on the timber industry, the actual net effect of the proposed logging restrictions would be much different. The costs and benefits of logging reductions would vary from place to place and it is impossible to trace them all. The available data indicate, though, that many, perhaps most, of the costs could be mitigated, and many-in some instances, perhaps all-of those that remain, would be offset by benefits.

Negative and Positive Impacts on Jobs

Restricting logging on 15-45 percent of private and state lands would potentially jeopardize up to 3,500ó18,500 jobs in the timber industry. Every job lost in the timber industry would jeopardize roughly two more jobs in other industries. Given the robust strength of the state's economy, however, these risks would quickly evaporate in most instances.

Oregon's robust economy would help dislocated workers find replacement jobs. Most would find new jobs within three months, and the percentage remaining unemployed after one year probably would not exceed the background percentage for the workforce as a whole. Unemployment-insurance benefits and other forms of assistance would smooth the transition. This is not to discount the trauma of being laid off or the fact that some workers would experience declines in earnings. Still, the region has, over the past decade, demonstrated its ability to mitigate and adjust to contractions in the timber industry.

The positive impacts on jobs would be less visible, but persist longer. If successful in restoring healthy salmon populations, the proposed logging restrictions would generate jobs in the commercial and recreational fisheries, and in related forms of recreation. By reducing the costs logging imposes on others-by reducing logging-caused sediment in streams, for example-the logging restrictions would improve the profits of the firms and the incomes of the households that currently bear those costs. Perhaps most important, by improving the state's overall natural-resource amenities, the logging restrictions would make the state more attractive to workers, households, and investors. Through its impacts on Oregon's quality of life, the logging restrictions would affect all sectors of the state's economy, even those with no direct link to forests, streams, or salmon.

IMPORTANT BACKGROUND ISSUES

This is not the first time that Oregon's timber industry has faced reductions in logging. Over the past two decades the state has adjusted to reductions far larger than those needed to restore salmon habitat on forest lands. These experiences have taught many lessons.

One is that, although some workers, families, firms, and communities endured severe difficulties as logging diminished, far more have prospered. There is no apparent reason to expect a different outcome following salmon-related reductions in logging. A rosy statewide picture, though, can mask the problems that logging restrictions might generate for some individuals, firms, and communities. These problems can be dealt with directly.

Another lesson is that the rights and responsibilities of landowners frame the definition of all the economic consequences that might follow implementation of tighter restrictions on logging and related activities. How one defines landowners' rights and obligations determines the composition of the costs and benefits associated with the proposed logging restrictions. Some in the state believe salmon-related restrictions on logging would restrict the rights of landowners to produce timber and, thus, impose costs on them. Others have a different view. To them, landowners have an obligation not to inflict further harm on salmon, not to impose costs on others, and to repair the harm from past logging activities. The rights and obligations of landowners have yet to be fully clarified.

A final lesson is the importance of weighing the consequences of making decisions that do not yield the intended results. One of the most frustrating characteristics of the proposals to restrict logging is that nobody can say definitively what impact they will have on salmon. Landowners understandably conclude from this that it would be unfair to them to impose restrictions that later prove fruitless. Given the public's strong opposition to allowing salmon to go extinct, however, it appears that it is better to err in favor of salmon than in favor of timber. If logging restrictions later prove unwarranted, the unlogged trees will have grown and become more valuable. In the meantime, there are numerous options available for mitigating unreasonable costs to landowners. In contrast, if needed restrictions are not implemented, so that salmon slide further toward extinction, the challenge of reversing the slide will become even greater.

ECONorthwest ©1999

Prepared for: Pacific Rivers Council, Oregon Trout, Audubon Society of Portland, Institute for Fisheries Resources.


(6) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Salmon farming overview for 1999

Date: Mon, 17 Jan 2000 12:09:30 -0500

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmReview"

IntraFish has just published a review of 1999 for salmon farming around the world. I've included the introduction below and you can find the full report at:

http://www.intrafish.com/engelsk/report/feat01.php3

Contents include:

Introduction

Norway - success and ambition hand in hand Not too bad for Chile Scotland - The looming shadow of ISA Ireland - Money Talks Faroes - Industry doubles production Tasmania - Growing at a healthy rate Canada - B.C. Delighted after lift of Moratorium Canada - N.B. Farmers are taking a major hit with ISA Increasing demand world-wide means there is space for more production

From the Introduction:

Looking at the progresses of the salmon farming industry world-wide, it seems that 1999 was one of the best years for salmon farmers in living memory. Every country, except perhaps Scotland and New Brunswick in Canada registered what one could euphemistically call 'good results'.

Norwegian farmers experienced excellent production, prices and market conditions; the EU deal again worked well and seemingly to the advantage of all parties. Prices at the gate for Norwegian salmon farmers were higher than last year's and the industry found itself surprised by its good fortune. The end of year exports saw a boost that many had dreamed but that few anticipated only a few months before. Culminating in Week 50 which recorded the highest ever volumes of salmon exported from Norway, 12,273 tonnes, so much so that many in Norway, the Faroes and Ireland have slaughtered more fish then first planned.

The Faroes even managed to double their production level to over 42,000 tonnes, a booster year! The Irish were allocated ample funds for the long term development of the industry and saw the government somehow commit to a national development plan with the [yet to be announced formally] adoption of the CIRCA report.

The BC industry got what it sees as the rightful and overdue reward for its lobbying efforts, with the lifting of the moratorium on the expansion of the industry there. But New Brunswick was not so fortunate in that there were still 20 outbreaks of the Infectious Salmon Anaemia disease (ISA) among the vaccinated fish, leading to 1million fish of all sizes being culled. It was premature to think that ISA would disappear outright with the first year of vaccination, and atypical hot summer conditions did not help either.

As for Scotland, the year could indeed have been better. Again, both the strong value of the Sterling and the exchange rate for the Norwegian kroner played in favour of Norway on the EU salmon market. The industry was still badly affected by the inertia of the ISA disease crisis, and early culls and restrictions on smolts put to sea have had a crippling effect. Many are awaiting compensation which may come too late and the industry has had - after refusing the first offer in February - to accept a deal for compensation which, as yet [13-1-2000], has not been sanctioned by the European Commission. The eradication policy in place for a time flogged the European market with great quantities of small Scottish salmon, to the detriment of the overall industry.

All this has been occurring with a background of increased internationalisation of the industry, where 'restructuration', 'alliances' and 'consolidation' are occurring at a sustained if not increasing pace. With giants like Nutreco, Pan Fish, Stolt Sea Farms, Hydro Seafood and others elbowing for a better control of the industry. Booker's sale of Marine Harvest Mc Connell to Nutreco in July, for nearly half the price it had been acquired for, signalled the rising ambition of Nutreco - which also acquired BOCM Pauls in the UK and BioMaster in Chile - and the vast availability of cash (though this does not necessarily apply to the entire industry, not even in Norway!) for some of the 'big ones' willing to expand.

The very good results registered by Pan Fish on the Oslo stock exchange will serve to strengthen the idea within financial circles in Norway and elsewhere that the salmon farming industry - and aquaculture in general - may become a fertile playground for investors. Other companies are presumably waiting in the aisles for their turn to make an entry on the stock exchange. There are also speculation that whoever buys Hydro Seafood may well want to jump onto that gravy train.

To take a measure of what the industry world-wide has felt in the past year, Intrafish has interviewed key national representatives and others, most of the interviews have been edited, with questions and comments often left in brackets [ ]. It was our choice to reproduce almost entirely [thanks to the WWW] these interviews as we felt they all spelt perspectives which may, one way or the other, interest at least some of our readers and give an insight into each of the national organisations' thinking.


(7) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Aquaculture news and info. from around the world

Date: Fri, 21 Jan 2000

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmReview"

The following information is attached below.

- US EPA announces new activity on aquaculture effluents
- Business Week on salmon farming boom in Chile
- Letters to ed/Montreal Gazette
- Greenpeace issues report: "Genetically Engineered Fish: Swimming Against the Tide of Reason"

--------------------------------------------------------------

>From Gary Jensen USDA-CSREES:

The following is an important notice from the Engineering and Analysis Division of the Office of Water at EPA announcing the agency's decision on "a new activity to develop pollutant controls in the form of nationally applicable discharge standards for commercial and public aquaculture operations". Please share this announcement with others in the U.S. aquaculture community. The federal Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture will be actively involved in collaborating with EPA and coordinating a network of stakeholders and expertise to assist in this process.

___________________________________________________

EPA Expands Focus on Nutrient Pollution

EPA's Office of Water is focusing new efforts to help reduce nutrient loadings from commercial agricultural and industrial operations nationwide. Among those efforts is a new activity to develop pollutant controls in the form of nationally applicable discharge standards (known as effluent limitations guidelines and standards) for commercial and public aquaculture operations.

Background:

In assessments of surface water quality, states most frequently cite siltation, nutrients, and pathogens as the major cause of water quality impairment. Over the past two years, EPA has directed resources of the Office of Water's Engineering and Analysis Division to address specific sources of these pollutants. Current activities addressing coal mining (remining operations and certain mine land reclamation activities in the arid west) and the construction and development industry are expected to result in significant reductions of soil and other solids reaching rivers, lakes and streams. Ongoing activities to control nutrients and pathogens from concentrated animal (pork, poultry, beef, and dairy) feeding operations are expected to improve water quality.

In 1974, EPA issued a summary technical document for use as guidance in developing controls for wastewater discharges from fish hatcheries and farms. At that time a decision was made not to issue final national effluent limitations guidelines and standards. Based on the 1997 agricultural census data, the aquaculture industry includes close to 5,000 land based and marine environment facilities. The aquaculture industry has facilities located in every state and territory, and is currently one of several growing segments of U.S. agriculture. Given the current growth of the aquaculture industry, and the inconsistent state regulatory oversight, EPA has decided to examine technologies currently available for the control of pollutants, primarily nutrients from land based and marine environment aquaculture operations. Although the aquaculture industry is currently subject to the NPDES permitting system, there are no national technology based standards for aquaculture. New national standards for aquaculture will assist the 43 states that are delegated by EPA to administer the NPDES permitting program.

Some aquaculture facilities can contribute nutrients to environmentally sensitive areas found in estuaries, rivers, lakes, and streams throughout the country. Improvements in wastewater treatment within the aquaculture industry have been employed by some facilities to reduce the nutrient pollutant load. It may be possible for more facilities to employ these technologies to reduce pollutant discharge loadings to surface waters and, in some cases, water quality impairment in portions of the U.S. By examining the cost and performance of pollution control technologies and practices, EPA is committed to developing national effluent limitations guidelines and standards that are consistent with the principles of good environmental stewardship and support the long-term sustainability of the industry.

Throughout this national regulatory effort, EPA will work closely with USDA and other federal agencies, academia, industry trade associations, state and local governments, citizen groups, environmental groups and other stakeholders. EPA's efforts will build on the technical expertise of nationally-recognized leaders, such as members and participants of the Federal Joint Subcommittee on Aquaculture (JSA) and its newly created Aquaculture Effluents Task Force. EPA will regularly provide to the JSA, the industry, and the public, information on its data needs and the status of their efforts throughout the regulatory development period.

___________________________________________________________

Copyright 2000 The McGraw-Hill Companies, Inc.

Business Week

January 24, 2000

SECTION: BUSINESS WEEK INTERNATIONAL EDITIONS; Spotlight on Chile; Number 3665; Pg. 4

LENGTH: 752 words

HEADLINE: A CITY TRANSFORMED BY A FISH...WORRIES THAT THE BOOM WON'T LAST

BYLINE: By Greg Brown in Puerto Montt; EDITED BY HARRY MAURER

Puerto Montt, a port town in southern Chile, has long been known as the tourist stop that isn't -- a collection of unpainted shacks and broken pavement overlooking an otherwise postcard-perfect bay. Despite beautiful views of ocean and volcanoes, renowned seafood, and richly stocked handicraft markets, most tourists move on quickly to parks and resorts further south.

But Puerto Montt is waking up nevertheless, largely thanks to a handsome fish, onchorhyncus kisuth, with tasty pink flesh. Since the salmon-farming boom began in these parts a decade ago, some 35,000 jobs have been created in Chile's 10th Region, a traditionally poor province of rolling farmlands, mountains, and rustic fishing villages. Many of the jobs are concentrated in and around 150,000-inhabitant Puerto Montt, thanks to a nearby airstrip. The best customers for Chilean salmon are finicky Japanese restaurant buyers, so the fish has to be cut into sushi-ready filets, frozen, and shipped by air within hours of harvesting.

Local producers, whose processing plants line the highway between the city and airport, are talking of doubling, even tripling their capacity in the coming decade. ''We are planning to grow 100% over the next three years,'' says Salmoamerica Chief Executive Thomas Kehler, whose 550-employee Chilean-owned company has sales of $ 30 million on a $ 12.5 million investment. ''And we can do that within the limits of the operations we already have.''

The flood of salmon investment -- some $ 4 billion in the 1990s -- has cut regional unemployment to 6%, nearly half that of the nation. In 2000, Chile's salmon exports are set to exceed $ 1 billion, up from just $ 159 million in 1991. Salmon now earns double the export value of the better-known Chilean wine industry and is helping diversify the economy away from dependence on copper, worth some $ 7 billion a year, about one-eleventh of gross domestic product.

This rapid growth may well continue, since salmon farming uses cheap, relatively simple technology. Improving genetics and better farming techniques are driving down costs fast. ''In 1985, it cost $ 10.20 to produce a kilogram of salmon in Chile,'' says Alejandro Pizarro, head of Pesquera Eicosal Ltd., a 580-employee company that racks up $ 35 million in sales annually. ''In 2000, it will cost $ 2.40.'' Bolstered by declining costs, investors plan to fully exploit the coast of the 10th Region and then extend their reach south into the chillier, island-dotted 11th Region. BACKPACKERS. Thanks to the boom, run-down Puerto Montt suddenly looks upwardly mobile. A colorful, three-floor mall opened in 1997, and a second is planned. Poverty rates dropped during the '90s, from 40% to 29%. Meanwhile, clapboard hostels for backpackers and laborers are giving way to reasonably priced business and tourist hotels. Housing starts have nearly doubled, and business construction is up by one-third.

Some view the changes with skepticism. ''I guess it's good that things are picking up, but I don't want to lose sight of our values,'' grumbles taxi driver Juan Rivas, 57. ''We sure don't want the crime problems they have in Santiago.'' In fact, crime has declined slightly over the past few years -- which may have something to do with all those jobs.

The salmoneros do face some serious obstacles. Chile, which dramatically reduced world salmon prices when its export-savvy government began promoting salmon farming a decade ago, now faces the challenge of adding value to a product that has become a commodity. Upmarket products, mostly aimed at busy U.S. families, such as filets packed with condiments and recipes, make up more than 50 cents on the dollar of salmon export income. ''Before, supermarkets didn't want to hear about value-added products,'' says Rodrigo Infante, of the Association of Chilean Salmon & Trout Farmers in Santiago. ''But we have to do this. If you're in a commodity market and the price drops, you're dead.''

An even bigger worry is tougher competition. Chile currently enjoys an advantage because fishmeal and fish oil, the main components of the feed used in salmon farms, are produced cheaply here. But U.S. salmon farmers accused Chilean salmoneros of dumping their goods below cost in 1997, a case that resulted in small punitive tariffs. That makes the Chileans nervous about underselling competitors. ''My dumping office is bigger than my accounting office,'' fumes Kehler. But salmon still looks to be the savior of the south.

URL: http://www.businessweek.com/index.html

GRAPHIC: Photograph: PUERTO MONTT PLANT The salmon boom has brought 35,000 to the region, and investment is still pouring in PHOTOGRAPH BY GREG BROWN ; Illustration: Map: Chile MAP BY NITA L. JANSEN

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

LOAD-DATE: January 20, 2000

------------------------------------------------

Copyright 2000 Southam Inc.

The Gazette (Montreal)

January 21, 2000, Friday, FINAL

SECTION: Editorial / Op-ed; B2

LENGTH: 305 words

HEADLINE: Fish-farm fears are exaggerated

I well understand the wish of any news-gathering organization to highlight an issue as important as the plight of the Atlantic salmon (Gazette, Jan. 10, ''Fish-farm salmon driving wild ones to near extinction''). However, in doing so, The Gazette has unfairly put the entire aquaculture industry in a negative light.

Your story failed to cite sources in the Canadian aquaculture industry, such as myself, scientists and others at Fisheries and Oceans Canada, or other aquaculture-industry representatives from across Canada. For example, the article raises the spectre of transgenic fish somehow ''pushing their wild cousins off the map.'' Yet a few phone calls to knowledgeable people would have revealed that the Canadian aquaculture industry considers transgenic fish to be purely experimental.

More important, the issue of the introduction of genes from farm salmon to wild is false. Both farmed and wild salmon are the same species, having the same genetic makeup. No new genes are being added if they breed.

This is one of a number of issues that was covered in a report I commissioned titled Potential Genetic Interaction Between Wild and Farm Salmon of the Same Species, by R.G. Peterson.

Moreover, there is no research to support the notion that genes from farmed salmon are negatively affecting the fitness of wild salmon stocks. Such proof would require investigations on a stock by stock basis.

This is an extremely complex issue, much too complex to warrant the certainties offered by the author and the limited number of sources cited in the article.

For a more balanced perspective on this topic, I invite your readers to visit our Web site at www. dfompo.gc.ca/ocad- bcda/index.html

Yves Bastien

Commissioner

Aquaculture Development

Fisheries and Oceans Canada

Ottawa, Ont.

Copyright 2000 Southam Inc.

The Gazette (Montreal)

January 21, 2000, Friday, FINAL

SECTION: Editorial / Op-ed; B2

LENGTH: 167 words

HEADLINE: Snafus happen

Garth Fletcher (Gazette, Jan. 10, ''Fish-farm salmon driving wild ones to near extinction'') unfairly portrays the concerns of those who question aquaculture and its methodologies. We are not eco-terrorists just because we fear another killer-bee intrusion into the natural environment. Accidents happen in all fields, regardless of safeguards, and to suggest otherwise is simply scientific arrogance.

Pen-bred salmon differ from their wild-caught cousins in that dye must be added to their feed to ensure the same orange flesh tone as that found in the wild.

To protect their investments, aqua- farmers add antibiotics and growth hormones to the feed. Though the medical profession is deeply concerned over the excessive use of antibiotics and fears the long-term, cumulative effects of chemicals and growth hormones on people, we continue to pass on these doctored foods to an unsuspecting and trusting public.

George Dupras

Director

Animals Alliance of Canada

Toronto, Ont.

-------------------------------------------------------

GENETIC FISH THREATEN NATURAL FISH STOCKS

20 January 2000

MONTREAL -- Genetically engineered (GE) fish pose a severe threat to wild fish populations says a Greenpeace report published today. Fish, genetically engineered to grow faster, could spread their foreign DNA to wild fish, destroying entire populations. According to Greenpeace, the threat posed by GE fish highlights the need for tight international rules to control commercial releases of genetically engineered organisms (GMOs).

"The commercialisation of GE fish is few steps away and we are only starting to understand the risks involved," said Michael Khoo of Greenpeace. "There are no regulation in Canada and the US where GE fish is presently hatched in containers. The delegates from 140 countries opening the Biosafety Protocol negotiations in Montreal today should study this report carefully and make the proper conclusions."

The commercial development of GE fish has mainly concentrated on making fish grow faster and larger. However, according to scientific modelling done at Purdue University in the US (1), just a small number of growth-enhanced GE fish could eradicate large populations of wild fish. Larger, GE fish attract more mates and quickly spread their characteristics throughout the population. However, the offspring of these fish have reduced reproductive capability and so reduce the health of the entire population.

The study was published on the opening day of the Biosafety Protocol meeting which is scheduled to run till January 28. The meeting will try to adopt rules on transboundary movement of GMOs. An earlier round of negotiations in February last year in Cartagena, Colombia, failed to reach an agreement due to strong opposition from the main grain exporting countries: Canada, the US, Argentina, Uruguay and Australia.

"Canada and the US have torpedoed every attempt to get a strong Biosafety Protocol," said Khoo. "Government representatives gathering in Montreal have their last chance to find a solution and we urge them not to fail. Industrialised countries like European Union member states have a responsibility to make it happen."

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION PLEASE CONTACT:

- Michael Khoo, Greenpeace Genetic Engineering Campaigner, +1 416 569 8408 or

- Mika Railo, Greenpeace International Press Officer in Montreal, +31 6 21296908

The Greenpeace report "Genetically Engineered Fish: Swimming Against the Tide of Reason" and daily updates from the Montreal Biosafety meeting are available on the Greenpeace website: www.greenpeace.org/~geneng/highlights/bio/montreal.htm

Note to editors:

(1) Muir WM, Howard RD (1999) Possible ecological risks of transgenic organism release when transgenes affect mating success: sexual selection and the Trojan gene hypothesis. PNAS 96:13853-13856


(8) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Leaked DFO report: farmed fish hurting wild Atl. salmon populations

Date: Sun, 23 Jan 2000

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmOpen FFList"

Copyright 2000 Southam Inc.

The Ottawa Citizen

January 22, 2000, Saturday, FINAL

SECTION: News; A1 / Front

LENGTH: 570 words

HEADLINE: Escaped fish harm wild salmon: Leaked Fisheries report backs up claim that farmed fish hurting wild stocks

BYLINE: Tom Spears

Escaped farm salmon have indeed damaged Canada's fragile stock of wild salmon by interbreeding with them, an internal report from Fisheries and Oceans Canada admits.

The report, made in preparation for next week's meeting of Canada's advisory committee on Atlantic salmon in Montreal, backs up the claims made by conservation groups who warn of dangers to Atlantic salmon.

Damage has already occurred, says the draft report, which has not been publicly released.

It comes shortly after a statement by Yves Bastien, Canada's commissioner of aquaculture, that there is no evidence farmed fish cause genetic disruption for wild Atlantic salmon.

U.S. federal fish agencies had already warned that interbreeding between wild and domestic fish was weakening the gene pool of salmon in the Gulf of Maine.

Now the Canadian DFO scientists are saying the evidence of genetic damage does exist. A copy of the report obtained by the Citizen says:

- All Atlantic salmon are not genetically the same. Each local population of salmon has its own distinct genetic fingerprints that are important because they allow salmon to adapt to local conditions. For instance, the salmon native to a river that melts in early spring will need spawning instinct that are different from salmon in a river where the ice goes out much later. They are also adapted to different acidity levels in different rivers.

- ''Genetic difference have been observed between wild and cultured (farmed) salmon.'' The greatest differences are between domesticated fish originally from European stock and wild fish native to North America.

- ''Wild and escaped domesticated Atlantic salmon can interbreed, and in some cases escaped domesticated salmon form the majority of fish in the spawning population.''

- A cross between wild and domesticated fish does nothing good for the wild fish. But ''there is evidence to indicate that there has been a reduction of fitness in the wild populations in the short terms when wild and domestic salmonids have interbred.'' Sal-monids are fish in the salmon family, including trout.

This point is ''the central issue of concern,'' the report says.

It quotes a 1997 study that says the smolts (young salmon) born from escaped salmon, and from hybrids of wild and domestic salmon, are less likely to survive than wild fish.

However, the study notes, the domestic and hybrid fish grow faster in their early months of life than young wild salmon.

This allows them to crowd out the wild fish in the competition for food and survival.

The salmon meetings scheduled for Monday and Tuesday are not directly connected with another set of Montreal meetings -- an international attempt to lay out a ''protocol'' on trade in genetically modified food.

But Greenpeace argues the salmon are a perfect example of the environmental dangers of genetically modified foods.

Greater than the danger from simple farmed fish is the danger that some day genetically engineered salmon will escape, says Miranda Holmes of Greenpeace.

These fish, still in the lab, are two or three years away from commercial release. Combining chinook and Atlantic salmon genes, they eat voraciously and grow faster than natural salmon.

But she said Fisheries Minister Herb Dhaliwal should prohibit the commercial use of transgenic fish. ''The primary responsibility at DFO is the protection of wild stocks,'' she said.

GRAPHIC: CP Color Photo: Farmed Atlantic salmon

**The Ocean Project** **SeaWeb Aquaculture Clearinghouse** Bill Mott, Director 102 Waterman Street, Suite 16 Providence, Rhode Island 02906 phone: 401/272-8822 fax: 401/272-8877 email: bmott@seaweb.org SAC web: www.seaweb.org/campaigns/sac TOP web: www.theoceanproject.org


(9) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: The Ocean Project: Update on activities

Date: Wed, 26 Jan 2000

From: "Bill Mott"

To:

I thought you might be interested in the following update emailed out earlier this week to organizations and agencies that have expressed interest in working with TOP. If you and/or your organization/agency would like to become involved in some capacity with The Ocean Project, please let me know and I can send additional information or you can visit our web site and fill out the participation form online. Also, if you're in DC and would like to come to a presentation of our national ocean awareness survey findings in March, please let me know. FYI, a copy of our press release from the other month is attached as well as a list of Partner Institutions.

Bill Mott, Director

-------------------------------------

January 24, 2000

Hello!

Thank you for your interest in our new public awareness initiative. I wanted to update you on how The Ocean Project activities are moving along.

Media Interest: Since the press release in late November, and the opening of our web site (www.theoceanproject.org), there has been a steady flow of interest. All media (tv, radio, print, and internet) picked up the story and continue to cover it to some degree.

Network of Partners: As a result of nearly 1,000 mailings, our network of partners has increased significantly. Many conservation groups and government agencies have expressed interest in working in some capacity with TOP and our network of more than 60 Partner Institutions (aquarium, zoos, museums). We hope to build a synergy with all these various players at some point in the coming months.

DC and Regional Presentations and Workshops: We are planning some presentations on our survey results in Washington, DC for the NGO and goverment agency communities (and any other interested parties). The presentation dates have not yet be set but will most likely occur in mid-March. Additionally, we hope to do a series of workshops/briefings around the country at various partner institutions in the coming months, depending on funding, and I will keep you posted.

TOP email list: I can add you to an email list to receive information periodically - just let me know! At some point it may actually turn into a listserv. Also, if you have friends or colleagues who should be included on the list to receive periodic updates, share information, coordinate activities, etc., please let me know. I would imagine that there will not be much 'traffic' on this list at first but will become more lively as specific programs and projects begin to be planned and implemented in the coming months.

Strategic Planning: The steering committee of The Ocean Project (Paul Boyle, New York Aquarium; Vikki Spruill, SeaWeb; Jim Hekkers, ColoradoÆs Ocean Journey; Kathy Sher, National Aquarium in Baltimore; Diane Sena, Monterey Bay Aquarium; John Nightingale, Vancouver Aquarium Marine Science Center; Michael Hutchins, American Zoo and Aquarium Association; Greg Stone, New England Aquarium; and Bert Vescolani, John G. Shedd Aquarium) and I will be working on strategic planning during the next few weeks.

If you have any questions about anything related to The Ocean Project, please feel free to contact me by phone or email anytime. Thank you very much and I will be in touch!


(9) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Aquaculture calendar
aquaculture calendar

Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2000 15:27:33 -0500

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmOpen FFList"

Here are some of the aquaculture-related events, conferences, etc. coming up through July 2000. For more info. on other events throughout the year, please visit our web site: http://www.seaweb.org/campaigns/sac/salmoncalendar.html

FEBRUARY

Aquaculture America 2000: "Unmasking the Marvels of Aquaculture"

February 2-5 New Orleans, Louisiana, USA The National Conference & Exposition of the World Aquaculture Society

For more information, go to: http://www.was.org/confer/neworleans/neworleans.htm

Abalone Symposium

February 6-11. International Symposium, Centre for Marine Studies, Cape Town, South Africa

Contact Peter Cook, fax +27 21 650 3283

Risk Analysis &emdash; Aquatic Health

February 8-10. Conference, Office International des Epizooties, Paris, France

Contact Dr. K. Sugiura, +33 144 15 1888

Conference on Aquaculture in the Third Millennium

Agenda for Action 20-25 February 2000 Thailand

The Network of Aquaculture Centres in the Asia-Pacific (NACA) and the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) are co-sponsoring the Conference on Aquaculture in the Third Millenium. The major focus will be on policy and planning with an emphasis on the social, technical and regulatory issues surrounding aquaculture development and aquaculture technologies. The conference will be a unique opportunity for participants to help shape the future direction of aquaculture development.

The Secretariat Aquaculture in Millennium III c/o NACA Headquarters Fisheries Compound Kasetsart Campus 10903 Jatujak, Bangkok, Thailand

Network of Aquaculture Centres in the Asia-Pacific Ph: +66 2 561 1728 Fax: +66 2 561 1727 Email: naca@inet.co.th Conference website and brochures: http://naca.fisheries.go.th

20th Anniversary Milford Aquaculture Seminar

February 28-March 1. Quality Inn Conference Center, 100 Pond Lily Avenue, New Haven, CT 06525

Contact Walter Blogoslawski (203) 579-7035 or 7000; walter.blogoslawski@noaa.gov

MARCH

Fish International 2000

March 23-26. Bremen, Germany

For information: contact MGH, Burgerweide, 28209 Bremen, Germany tel. +49 421 3505-260, fax: +49 421 3505-681 info@fishinternational.de

Aquaculture International 2000 & Fishing 2000

March 30-April 1. Scottish Exhibition and Conference Center, Glasgow, Scotland

Aquaculture international is set to be just part of a "total fish show," as it runs alongside Europe's most successful annual commercial fishing exhibition, Fishing 2000.

For information: contact Sue Hill, Exhibitions Manager, Emap Highway Events, MEED House, 21 John St., London WC1N 2BP UK tel. +44 (0) 207 470 6340 fax: +44 (0) 207 831 2509 sueh@meed.emap.co.uk

APRIL

Fish Health Workshop

April 6, 2000 Eastport, Maine

For further information, contact: Dr. Mike Opitz, Extension Veterinarian University of Maine Cooperative Extension 5735 Hitchner Hall, Rm. 105 Orono, ME 04469-5735 Phone: 207/581-2771 Fax: 207/581-2729 Email: mopitz@umext.maine.edu

MAY

AQUA 2000 - "Responsible Aquaculture Development in the New Millennium" The annual international conference of the World Aquaculture Soceity & European Aquaculture Society

May 2-6, 2000 The Acropolis Convention Center Nice, France

For more information, contact: World Aquaculture Society 21710 7th Place West, Bothell WA 98021 USA Tel: +1-425-485-6682 Fax: +1-425-483-6319 E-mail: worldaqua@aol.com

European Aquaculture Society Slijkensesteenweg 4, B - 8400 Oostende Belgium Tel: +32-59-32-38-59 Fax: +32-59-32-10-05 E-mail: eas@unicall.be Also, some information available at: http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~booghe/eas/conf/aqua2000.htm

AquaVision 2000

May 9-11. Stavanger, Norway.

AquaVision is Skretting and Nutreco Aquaculture's global business conference for the fish farming industry. One of the main themes will be Value Chain Management &emdash; how to increase value through cooperation and coordination of work with farmed fish from the cage, via distribution and processing, right through the consumer.

For information: contact Communications Manager Vidar Julien, Tel.: +47 51 88 59 02 or +47 92 26 46 96, fax +47 51 58 43 68 vidar.julien@skretting.no

Tuna 2000 Bangkok

May 25-27. Bangkok, Thailand

Sixth Infofish World Tuna Trade Conference Contact: Infofish &emdash; Tuna 2000, Bangkok, P.O. Box 10899, 50728 Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia, tel. (603) 291-4466, fax: (603) 291-6804 infish@tm.net.my OR infish@po.jaring.my

Aquaculture Canada 2000 - The 17th Meeting of the Aquaculture Association of Canada

May 28-31, 2000 Hotel Beausejour Moncton, New Brunswick, Canada

For more information, contact: Dr. Andrew Boghen Phone: 506-858-4321 Fax: 506-858-4541 Email: boghena@umoncton.ca

JUNE

1st Maricult Conference "Exploitation of living marine resources for the new millennium - Bridging potentials and environmental constraints "

26- 28 June 2000 Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway

The following organizations have contributed in the funding of projects or/and by direct support to the Conference: MARICULT Research Programme, Norsk Hydro ASA, EU Commision, Research Council of Norway , NTNU, SINTEF

More information at: http://www.maricult.org/public/conference2000/

17th Annual NASCO Meeting

June 2000 New Brunswick, Canada

JULY

IIFET 2000 - The 10th Biennial Conference of the International Institute of Fisheries Economics & Trade

July 10-13, 2000 Oregon State University in Corvallis, Oregon, USA.

The IIFET 2000 website is located at http://osu.orst.edu/Dept/IIFET/html/2000

For further information, contact: Dick Johnston IIFET 2000 Conference Organizer richard.s.johnston@orst.edu or IIFET 2000 Organizing Committee Members Ann Shriver (ann.l.shriver@orst.edu), Debi Mandigo (debi.mandigo@orst.edu), and Pam Garland (garlandp@peak.org).

Genetics in Aquaculture VII

July 15-22, International Association for Genetics in Aquaculture, Symposia Townsville, Australia

Contact and conference info: http://www.aims.gov.au/pages/conferences/genaqua/genaqua2000-a.html

The Third International Recirculating Aquaculture Conference - 2000

July 20 - 23, 2000 Roanoke, Virginia, USA

For more information contact: Dr. George Libey Recirculating Aquaculture Conference 2000 Virginia Tech (0418) Blacksburg, VA 24061 USA Phone: 540/231-6805 Fax: 540/231-9293 E-mail: CFAST@vt.edu


(1) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: Maine salmon update

Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 11:49:57 -0500

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmReview"

This is a good overview of the situation in Maine.

Another public hearing on this issue in Rockland tonight.

Copyright 2000 Bangor Daily News

BANGOR DAILY NEWS (BANGOR, MAINE)

January 26, 2000 Wednesday

HEADLINE: Use of hybrids complicates salmon talks

BYLINE: Mary Anne Clancy Of the NEWS Staff

MACHIASPORT -- Atlantic Salmon of Maine has $ 25 million worth of fish in the water, a payroll of $ 4.6 million and 165 employees with knots in their stomachs.

The workers fear their jobs and their company will leave Washington County if two federal agencies prevail on a proposal to classify wild Atlantic salmon in eight Maine rivers as an endangered species.

Five of the eight rivers are in Washington County, home of Maine's $ 60 million aquaculture industry.

And Atlantic Salmon of Maine's fish farms -- seven ocean lease sites totaling 145 acres -- are within 12 miles of three of the Washington County rivers.

The problem, according to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service, is that farmed fish can escape from their ocean cages during seal attacks or storms at sea.

If the aquaculture salmon enter the rivers and breed with the wild fish, they could alter the genetic makeup of the last self-sustaining wild runs of Atlantic salmon in the United States, the fish agencies say.

Compounding the problem is that Atlantic Salmon of Maine and other Washington County fish farmers raise European hybrids -- fish whose genetic makeup is distinctly different from that of thewild salmon.

"And so what? " responds Alf Aarskog, Atlantic Salmon of Maine's production manager. "From a genetic point of view, every river in Maine should be happy if we lost 1 million fish. It would prevent inbreeding. "

Aarskog and his colleagues say the gene pool of the "the so-called wild fish" is too small, resulting in salmon that are "brothers and sisters. "

In contrast, they say, European salmon are the product of extensive genetic engineering in countries such as Norway. The European-strain fish are bred for salmon farming and grow to market size much faster than North American strains. That, according to the salmon aquaculture industry, allows Maine to compete with Chile and other salmon producers in the U.S. market.

"These fish have been chosen," said Steve Swartz, Atlantic Salmon's hatchery production manager. "They are 10 to 15 percent larger, historically, and they are more disease-resistant. "

The companies that use the European fish refuse to stop, and the Maine Department of Marine Resources is backing them up.

The thought of losing the competitive edge that European salmon provide is so unthinkable that the subject wasn't even on the table during nine months of negotiations with the federal fish agencies.

"The state wouldn't even negotiate on that," said Dan Kimball, the Atlantic salmon recovery specialist for the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service.

Instead, the talks centered on ways to keep farmed salmon from escaping.

Those negotiations reached a stalemate just weeks before Interior Secretary Bruce Babbitt announced Oct. 13 that the two federal fish agencies were proposing to place wild Maine salmon on the endangered species list.

Swartz said the industry dropped out of the talks and let DMR continue the negotiations. The experience was just too frustrating, Swartz said, because the federal agencies changed the ground rules as they went along.

Swartz maintains both fish services knew the industry used European hybrids back in 1997 when they accepted Maine's Atlantic salmon conservation plan and withdrew their 1995 proposal to list the Maine salmon as a threatened species.

Kimball said the federal agencies knew the industry used European-strain salmon to get started in the late 1980s, but believeda 1995 state law had put an end to the practice.

The Maine law prohibits importation of non-North American fish or eggs.

In addition to the state law, the Army Corps of Engineers, which issues federal permits for aquaculture leases, has a standard condition prohibiting importation of non-North American fin fish at any stage of development, Kimball said.

"We felt that between the state requirements and the Corps permits, the European stock would phase out," he said.

But, in 1998 the federal agencies learned the industry was continuing to use European strains because Maine law did not prohibit importing sperm, he said.

Swartz said he began importing European salmon sperm for use in Atlantic Salmon of Maine's hatchery operations two years ago. "It was totally legal," he said.

The federal agencies became aware of the practice in September 1998, when the Army Corps of Engineers was reviewing Atlantic Salmon of Maine's application for a 10-acre aquaculture lease off Stone Island in Machiasport.

The National Marine Fisheries Services objected to the use of imported sperm and asked the Corps to circulate a letter to the aquaculture industry requesting voluntary compliance with the prohibition on the use of European strains.

U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe of Maine interceded for the company and convinced Roland Smitten, director of the National Marine Fisheries Service, to authorize an immediate permit to Atlantic Salmon of Maine.

According to a news release from Snowe at the time, the federal agencies and the state agreed to discuss the issue and reach a solution no later than March 15, 1999.

The March deadline came and went without an agreement.

With Maine refusing to budge on the use of European strains, both federal fish agencies say they worked with industry and DMR to come up with a plan for reinforcing aquaculture cages to prevent escapes.

Key to that discussion was a monitoring plan: Some way was needed to mark the aquaculture fish so they could be traced back to a problem cage.

Mary Colligan, the endangered species specialist for the National Marine Fisheries Service, said marking was important because the industry maintained it could develop escape-proof cages. There had to be some wayto determine if those reinforcements would work, she said.

George LaPointe, Maine's marine resources commissioner, said last week that the negotiations broke down because the two sides couldn't agree on a phase-in schedule for the enhanced cages or which fish should be marked and who would mark them.

LaPointe told those who attended a Jan. 8 Washington County rally against the proposed listing that the aquaculture industry had agreed to reinforce its cages and mark its fish. But, he said, the federal fish agencies refused to mark the Atlantic salmon that are raised at the Craig Brook National Fish Hatchery in Orland.

Those Craig Brook fish are spawned from brood stock collected from five of the eight salmon rivers.

The juvenile fish are put back into their home rivers under a salmon recovery program developed by U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the Maine Atlantic Salmon Commission in 1991.

Kimball said LaPointe's characterization of where the talks broke down is inaccurate. The industry had agreed -- in principle -- to reinforce its cages, but wanted to do it on a schedule that coincided with depreciation, he said.

"That would take several years," Kimball said. "We wanted to phase it in as soon as possible. "

And, he said, the state did not agree to a marking program.

The state committed only to setting up a group to study the feasibility of a marking system. LaPointe was to review the work of the committee and if he determined that marking was "feasible and necessary," he "could decide" to proceed with marking, Kimball said.

Marking fish from the federal hatchery doesn't make sense because the whole purpose of marking is to determine whether aquaculture fish can escape from the reinforced cages, Kimball said.

Aquaculture companies are not required to report escapes. When farmed fish are found in the rivers, the industry maintains, they are either wild fish or salmon that escaped from Canadian salmon farms, Kimball said.

Bobby Hukki, assistant farm manager for Atlantic Salmon of Maine, said his company already uses an enhanced cage system, including heavier twine, better predator netting to protect against seals, and tensioning nets that are better able to withstand rough weather.

"We're willing to make the extra investment because our sites are more exposed and it makes economic sense," Hukki said. "But we can't negotiate for the entire industry. "

Hukki noted that Atlantic Salmon of Maine may be in a better financial position to make the expenditure than smaller companies that aren't as well capitalized.

Atlantic Salmon of Maine is 80 percent owned by Conti-Sea, a joint venture by two multinational agribusinesses -- the former Continental Grain and Seaboard Corp. The remaining 20 percent is owned by Morten Heleseen, a Norwegian businessman.

Aarskog said the company produces 40 percent of Maine's farmed salmon and is second only to Stolt Sea Farm of Norway, an international aquaculture company that is the fifth-largest producer of salmon in the world, he said.

The multinational companies that dominate Maine fish farming provide good jobs in Washington County, where the average salary is $ 399 a week, according to the Maine Department ofLabor.

Those who work on Atlantic Salmon of Maine's fish farms begin at $ 7 an hour, and the starting wage for the 90 employees at the company's Machiasport processing plant begins at $ 11 an hour, plus benefits.

Hukki said most employees make more than that because they have been with Atlantic Salmon of Maine for years.

In addition to the company's 150 employees in Washington County, Atlantic Salmon of Maine has hatcheries in Rangeley and Solon and a sales team in Belfast, Swartz said.

The debate on salmon aquaculture and the possible threat it poses to wild salmon stocks is also taking place in Canada, where a recent report indicates that farmed salmon have already bred with dwindling wild stocks.

Canada prohibits use of European stocks in salmon aquaculture, but fish farmers there are fighting to have that restriction lifted. Conservation groups are fighting the proposal.

Hearings scheduled on salmon controversy

10 a.m. Saturday, University of Maine at Machias' Performing Arts Center.

6 p.m. Monday, Ellsworth Middle School.

6 p.m. Tuesday, Rockland District Elementary School.

GRAPHIC: Atlantic Salmon of Maine employees Karen Blackie (left) and Kathie Barkles, both of Caratunk, inoculate farm-raised salmon against four types of bacteria at the company's Solon facility, where brood stock is raised. (NEWS Photo by Bob DeLong)

LOAD-DATE: January 26, 2000


(2) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE] -- Back to the Table of Contents --

Subject: News coverage in Maine of Atlantic salmon issues

Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2000 22:40:40 -0500

From: "Bill Mott"

To: "FishFarmReview"

News from yesterday's edition of Bangor Daily News and Sunday's (front page) Portland Press Herald follow.

Copyright 2000 Bangor Daily News

BANGOR DAILY NEWS (BANGOR, MAINE)

January 31, 2000 Monday

HEADLINE: Officials take heat over salmon listing Snowe, Collins, Baldacci attack reasons behind federal endangered species proposal

BYLINE: Mary Anne Clancy Of the NEWS Staff

MACHIAS -- Seven hours into a public hearing Saturday, Dana Urquhart stepped to the microphone and addressed representatives of two federal agencies that want to protect the wild Atlantic salmon in eight Maine rivers as an endangered species.

"I have to oppose it because you haven't shown me anything but speculation," said the Bucks Harbor fisherman turned salmon farmer.

He told600 people gathered at the University of Maine at Machias he does not trust federal Endangered Species Act proposals.

"I have to think there is something else behind it. "

Suspicion about the proposal was a theme voiced throughout the day Saturday as a crowd turned out for the first of three public hearings conducted by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and the National Marine Fisheries Service.

The university set up closed-circuit televisions in two additional buildings so that those who could not fit into the main hall could view the proceedings.

Washington County is home to five of the eight rivers, and many of those who spoke said they feared an endangered species listing because it could have disastrous effects on the county's salmon aquaculture, wild blueberry and forest industries.

In addition to the specter of additional regulations is a suspicion voiced over the past several weeks by many opponents, including Gov. Angus King. They say a listing would allow "radical environmentalists" to use the Endangered Species Act to turn Washington County into "a wilderness park. "

"We've been called promoters of fear," said George "Bud" Finch, the mayor of Eastport. "I'm very proud of that. There are people who want to put us out of here so they can have it for their playground. "

Many state and local officials spoke against the federal proposal, but the most vigorous attack came from U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe, who opened the hearing with a 40-minute assault on the science and the timing of the proposal.

Snowe called the proposed protection listing "a Draconian proposal" and said it would result in "an economic decapitation of this part of the state. "

She berated the federal agencies for what she said was "an about-face" on their 1997 decision to accept Maine's Atlantic salmon conservation plan rather than list the salmon as a threatened species.

Now, just two years later, the federal agencies have decided to list the species as endangered -- despite all that Maine has accomplished, she said.

"And you haven't been able to specify one thing that a listing could do that the state plan can't," Snowe said.

Snowe accused both fish agencies of acting out of fear that they would lose a lawsuit by national and regionalenvironmental groups.

Defenders of Wildlife and others sued U.S. Fish and Wildlife and the National Marine Fisheries Service early last year, maintaining that the agencies violated the Endangered Species Act when they accepted the state plan rather than listing the fish as threatened.

A federal ruling on the lawsuit, which seeks an emergency listing of the fish, is expected any day.

U.S. Sen. Susan Collins also questioned what would be accomplished by li