|
(1) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: LAWMAKERS LACK BROAD VIEW OF WORLD SALMON MARKETS
(Anchorage Daily News business column on wild/farmed salmon)
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999
From: "William S. Mott"
E-Mail Address:
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
Copyright 1999 Anchorage Daily News
Anchorage Daily News
July 4, 1999, Sunday, FINAL EDITION
SECTION: BUSINESS, Pg. 1C
LENGTH: 567 words
HEADLINE: LAWMAKERS LACK BROAD VIEW OF WORLD SALMON MARKETS
BYLINE: David Reaume
BODY:
With farmed salmon in growing abundance, there is talk in Alaska of the death
of the Alaska salmon industry. Modified by the phrase ''as we know it today,''
that sentiment holds some truth. But if it is viewed in the absolute, there is
no conceivable way that salmon will cease to be an important Alaska product.
With the world literally starving for protein, markets will be found. The real
questions are at what price and in what form.
Barbara Belknap, executive director of the Alaska Seafood Marketing Institute
recently described farmed salmon as a commodity. What I think she meant was
that
farmed salmon is so abundant and so cheap that the product had lost, or at
least
had begun to lose, its place as a specialty item. Salmon was becoming
common and
was no longer able to command a premium price.
What this means for Alaska's salmon harvesters is plain. High-cost harvesting
techniques like traditional gillnetting and trolling are being priced out of
existence. The Alaska salmon industry of the future will consist mainly of
terminal-area harvesting by a select fleet of high-tech operators. A small,
high-quality troll fleet will service the luxury end of the retail market
(restaurants and certain supermarkets). With the demise of most nonterminal
fisheries, sports harvesting will take on a new and potentially more lucrative
glow. Only subsistence harvesters will be able to stay with the old way of
doing
things.
In the past year or so, a few small independent Alaska processors have been
encouraged by sales of salmon that are either highly processed or packaged in a
new and innovative way. If these processors can obtain fish at low enough
prices, they may be financially successful in the long run. But their
ability to purchase their raw material at a price low enough for them to compete on a
large scale with the salmon farmers presupposes the major restructuring of the
harvesting portion of the industry that I have been talking about.
As this scenario continues to play itself out, pressure will increase on
legislators to authorize salmon farming in Alaska. The argument will be --
as it
has been -- that farming is the low-cost way of producing fish and that Alaska
has no choice but to join the party.
I disagree. The farmed-salmon industry is a classic example of how an
initially profitable opportunity can attract so many new producers that profits
fall below the level that justifies much of the investment in the industry.
Alaska's best strategy is to continue to emphasize the differences between wild
and farmed salmon, indeed, to increase that emphasis. Product differentiation
can spark a major surge in sales.
I have argued that salmon harvesters suffer because the processing end of the
industry is not perfectly competitive in the textbook sense. A key point I have
often made is that Alaska red salmon still commands more than 40 percent of the
Japanese market, implying that Alaska's potential market power is not to be
sneezed at. But as long as most of Alaska's decision makers continue to act as
if world salmon markets are made up of just a bunch of small-time players
behaving independently, they will never have the political will needed to
realize the industry's full potential. That is too bad. It does not have to be
that way.
q David M. Reaume is a Juneau-based economist. His opinion column appears
every fourth Sunday.
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
LOAD-DATE: July 6, 1999
(2) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Aquaculture and Food Safety Issues
Date: Tue, 6 Jul 1999
From: "William S. Mott"
E-Mail Address:
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
To: FishFarmRev
Following thanks to Mark Ritchie.
_________________________________________
FOOD SAFETY ISSUES ASSOCIATED WITH PRODUCTS FROM AQUACULTURE
WHO Technical Report Series 883
Report of a Joint FAO/NACA/WHO Study Group
World Health Organization--Geneva
The report (55 pages) can be downloaded from the WHO site at:
http://www.who.int/fsf/new.htm
Abstract:
The past decade has seen rapid expansion in aquaculture production. In the
fisheries sector, as in animal production, farming is replacing
hunting as the primary food production strategy. In future, farmed fish
will be an even more important source of protein foods than they are today,
and the safety for human consumption of products from aquaculture is of
public health significance. This is the report of a Study Group that
considered food safety issues associated with farmed finfish and
crustaceans. The principal conclusion was that an
integrated approach -- involving close collaboration between the
aquaculture, agriculture, food safety, health and education sectors --
is needed to identify and control hazards associated with products from
aquaculture.
Food safety assurance should be included in fish farm management and form
an integral part of the farm-to-table food safety continuum. Where
appropriate, measures should be based on Hazard Analysis and Critical
Control Point (HACCP) methods; however, difficulties in applying HACCP
principles to small-scale farming systems were recognized. Food safety
hazards associated with products from aquaculture differ according to
region, habitat and environmental conditions, as well as methods of
production and management. Lack of awareness of hazards can hinder risk
assessment and the application of risk management strategies to aquaculture
production, and education is therefore needed.
Chemical and biological hazards that should to be taken into account in
public health policies concerning products from aquaculture are discussed
in this report, which should be of use to policy-makers and public health
officials.
(3) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Salmon farming news from around the world
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999
From: "William S. Mott"
E-Mail Address:
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
To: FishFarmRev
1) Two new reports (from the ASF and DFO) on threats to wild salmon from
fish farm escapees
2) New Acting GM of the New Brunswick Salmon Growers' Association
3) (Norwegian-owned) Stolt to buy (Canadian) International Aqua Foods
4) World's second biggest producer of salmon is sold (Nutreco acquires MHM)
5) More info. on open ocean aquaculture project off NH
6) Info on IntraFish - important source of info. on the aquaculture
industry
Following news from IntraFish:
1) Escaped salmon in NB
Numerous salmon that have escaped from Bay of Fundy fish
farms are endangering wild stocks in New Brunswick rivers, according
to two new reports from the Atlantic Salmon Federation and the
Canadian Department of Fisheries and Oceans.
07/07/99 07:00
The reports claim that wild species are being overtaken by
escapees from the substantial fish farms located near the rivers.
According to The National Fisherman, an Atlantic Salmon
Federation report states that wild stocks in regions where salmon aquaculture
is heavily practised now face potential extinction. Both reports highlight the
scale of the escapees on these stocks Last spring, escaped farmed salmon made up
nearly 90 percent of salmon found in New Brunswick's Magaguadavic River, the
reports say.
In the 1980s, researchers found over 1,000 wild salmon in
the river. By 1992, the count had dropped to 292 wild salmon; this year they
found just 31. Moreover, in surveys of four other nearby rivers,
researchers could find only two salmon, both wild.
According to the federation, the escaped farm salmon are
contributing to those declining wild populations. The farmed fish, which grew
faster, nosed out wild salmon in the river, says Fred Whoriskey, vice-president of
research for the federation, a non-profit group formed to protect Atlantic
salmon stocks.
But the farmed fish are too slow to compete for food or
elude predators once in the ocean, and are unable to return to the river.
Meanwhile, the DFO report is suggesting new regulations for aquaculture aimed at
protecting wild salmon stocks.
2) New NBSGA leader
The former General Manager of the New Brunswick Salmon Growers' Association
- Bill Thompson - has been replaced by Acting General Manager, Ms Nell
Halse.
3) Stolt to buy International Aqua Foods Leading salmon producer
The multinational and Norwegian-owned aquaculture company
Stolt Sea Farm is willing to pay £6.86 million for the Canadian
aquaculture company International Aqua Foods Ltd.
07/02/99 07:00
This merger will make Stolt Sea Farm the leading producer
of salmon in North-America, according to MD of Stolt Sea Farm, Mr Niels
G. Stolt-Nielsen.
Stolt Sea Farm runs fish-farms in Norway, Scotland, France,
Spain, USA Canada and Chile. International Aqua Foods had a turnover
last year of £16.14 million derived from an annual production of 6,500 tonnes.
According to the Norwegian newspaper Dagens Naeringsliv,
Stolt Sea Farm has secured the right to buy more than half of the
International Aqua Foods' stocks from the large stockholders High Liner Foods Incorporatedand Cote 100 Inc. The Stolt bid is 48% over the stock exchange rate. This
merger gives Stolt Sea Farm a new foot to stand on as International Aqua Foods
also breeds tilapia, now a very popular fish in restaurants.
4) Worlds second biggest producer of salmon is sold Nutreco aquires MHM
Nutreco has aquired the salmon farming and proseccing
acticties of Marine Harvest McConnel (MHM) in Chile and Skotland. The
purchase price is NLG 110 million - £32,7 millions.
07/15/99 09:41
Marine Harvest Mc Connel, owned by Booker plc, employs 800
people in Scotland and 700 people in Chile, and is the world`s second
biggest salmon farmer and processor.
- This is a major step in our strategy to increase our
presence in the salmon value chain, Nutreco Chief Operating Officer Wout Dekker
commented. - With Nutreco`s long aquaculture experience and strong R&D
know-how we are pleased to join with one of the other pioneers in our
industry. Marine Harvest Mc Connel, which is known in the market as a quality salmon
producer with strong links to retail and further processors, Dekker said.
The purchace price is NLG 110 million - £32,7 millions. To
optimise its tax effiency the transaction has been structured as financed
partly by cash and partly by shares.
The share issue element amounts to less than four per cent
of Nutreco`s issued ordinary share capital.
MHM results will be included in Nutrecos consolidated
income statement with effect from July 1th 1999. The aquisition is expected to
contribute positively to the 1999 earnings per share on a fully dilutet basis.
In 1998 Marine Harvest Mc Connel produced more than 43 000
tonnes of Atlantic Salmon, representing some 7 per cent of the world
production Two thirds of the production is based in Scotland, where
Marine Harvest McConnel has a production share of 30 per cent and one third
in Chile with a 12 per cent share. It has a turnover of NLG 320 million (EUR 145 million).
5) Open Ocean Aquaculture
One of the first large scale experiments in open ocean
aquaculture on the East Coast is getting underway off the coast of New
Hampshire.
07/06/99 07:00
GreatBay Aquafarms, the Portsmouth Fishermen's Co-op, and
the University of New Hampshire are cooperating on a $2 million project to
grow out summer flounder in open ocean cages.
GreatBay has been growing summer flounder, or Fluke, for
the Japanese market for several years. This summer they will take 6,000 1 lb.
Fluke, and hold them in open ocean cages for three to four months, by which time
they should have reached 1.5 to 2 lbs. In weight.
The Fish pens are 15 meters in diameter and 9 meters deep.
They will be anchored approximately 60 feet beneath the surface.
So far offshore pens have been difficult to manage in the
U.S., because of the high cost of feeding fish in these locations. However, with
the increasing difficulty of securing leases on inshore sites, offshore sites may
become more attractive.
There are no consistent federal regulations in place
governing the use of offshore pens in federal waters. This site, located near the Isle of
Shoals, about 12 miles off the coast, is in the state waters of New Hampshire. The
30 acre site is leased from the state for $750 per acre per year.
6) Norwegian industry have chosen IntraFish Norwegians in cyberspace
All major aquaculture and fisheries organisations in Norway
have chosen the company IntraFish as the provider of their
Internet-solutions and websites.
07/05/99 07:00
The goal of these organisations is to strengthen the
information available to their members and provide a convenient way for feedback andexchange of opinions.
"We chose IntraFish because they have created ameeting-point for the industry
on the net," said Mr Geir Andreassen, MD of the Norwegian
Federation of Fisheries and Aquaculture Industry. "IntraFish has now
become the most important place to be on the Internet for the Norwegian
fishery industry," Mr Steve Hernes, MD of Intra Fish, commented. IntraFish is
also the publisher of the newsletter Seafarm Business Review.
_________________________________________________________
(4) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Upcoming events related to salmon farming and aquaculture
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999
From: "William S. Mott"
E-Mail Address:
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
To: FISHFARM
Some of you may be interested in planning now to attend/participate in the
following events that are coming up. Don't forget to check out the
Clearinghouse web site for our full calendar of events
and other information related to salmon farming.
Bill Mott
Aquatech '99 - 'Canada's national meeting on Aquatic Biotechnology.'
July 27-30,
Fredericton, New Brunswick
For more information, contact:
Tillmann Benfey
Phone: (506) 452-6293
Email: benfey@unb.ca
AUGUST
Aquaculture Europe '99
(AquaNor 99, an international commercial and technical trade show, will
directly follow)
August 7 to 10, 1999
Norwegian University for Science and Technology (NTNU)
Trondheim, Norway
Sponsored by European Aquaculture Society in co-operation with the
Nor-Fishing Foundation
For more information, contact:
European Aquaculture Society
Aquaculture Europe 99
Slijkensesteenweg 4
B-8400 Oostende
Belgium
Tel. +32 59 32 38 59
Fax +32 59 32 10 05
E-mail: eas@unicall.be
http://allserv.rug.ac.be/~booghe/eas/conf/conf120.htm
Transgenic Animal Research Conference
August 14-19, 1999
Granlibakken Conference Center, Tahoe City, California
Sponsored by Animal Science and the UC Davis Biotechnology Program.
This is an international meeting that will bring together representatives
from the leading laboratories doing cutting edge work on transgenic
research in animal species. This meeting is a follow-up to the meeting held
in Granlibakken, Lake Tahoe, August 24-27, 1997
Information as it becomes available will be displayed on the internet:
http://www.biotech.ucdavis.edu
1999 American Fisheries Society Annual Meeting - "Integrating Fisheries
Principles from Mountain to Marine Habitats"
August 29-September 2, 1999
Adams Mark Hotel
Charlotte, North Carolina, USA
For further information, contact:
Betsy Fritz
AFS, 5410 Grosvenor Lane, Bethesda, MD 20814
Phone: 301-897-8616, ext 212
Fax: 301-897-8096
Email: bfritz@fisheries.org
http://www.fisheries.org/annual99/index.ht
SEPTEMBER
International Council for the Exploration of the Sea (ICES) Symposium on
the Environmental Effects of Mariculture
13 - 16 September 1999
Algonquin Hotel
St. Andrews, NB, Canada
The aim of the ICES Symposium on the Environmental Effects of Mariculture
is to provide a state-of-the-art review of key aspects of the scientific
research concerned with understanding: (1) the environmental effects of
bivalve and fish farming in the coastal zone, and (2) the influence of
local environmental factors on mariculture productivity. The Symposium will
bring together a multidisciplinary group of experts who will be able to
share results and enhance international cooperation and collaborative
research.
For further information check out the Symposium web site:
http://www.ices.dk/symposia/eem.htm
Those who wish to attend or to receive additional information are asked to
indicate their interest in an e-mail message addressed to Brenda Best at
the address below.
ICES Symposium on Environmental Effects of Mariculture
Department of Fisheries & Oceans Biological Station
St Andrews, NB, Canada E0G 2X0
E-mail: bestb@mar.dfo-mpo.gc.ca
__________________________________________________
(6) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: 'organic' salmon
Date: Thu, 15 Jul 1999
From: "William S. Mott"
E-Mail Address:
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
To:
From Seafood.com:
Two Alaska Companies Want "Organic" Label for Wild Salmon
June 24- Seafood.com -- Two Alaskan companies, Capilano Pacific in
Dillingham, and Prime Select
Seafoods in Cordova, have started pilot programs to allow the marketing of
their wild king salmon,
sockeye, and coho, as '"organic". They have received strong support from
Alaska Governor Tony
Knowles.
The organic standards board in Washington DC is expected to make a
determination this fall whether wild
ocean caught fish can be certified organic. The move to certify ocean fish
came about after it was learned
that some farmed salmon will likely be certified, based on growth in a
controlled environment, and a diet
that resembles their natural diet in the wild.
The organic food industry is a rapidly growing niche market, growing at
about a 20% to 24% rate annually
over the past several years. It is a natural market for seafood that meets
the chain of custody requirements
for organic food.
The two companies have both hired certifying agents to make sure that their
operations meet the required
standards, which include a designated harvest area, management history,
management that aims for
environmentally sustainable yields, and no added or prohibited substances.
[News and commentary from www.seafood.com, the web site for commercial
seafood buyers, sellers and
consumers. Email Comments
(5) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Salmon farming news from Maine
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 1999
From: "William S. Mott"
E-Mail Address:
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
To: FishFarmRev
News follows on the growing and organized opposition to proposed salmon
farm expansion by Atlantic Salmon of Maine.
__________________________________________________
Copyright 1999 Bangor Daily News
BANGOR DAILY NEWS (BANGOR, MAINE)
July 14, 1999 Wednesday
LENGTH: 937 words
HEADLINE: Courts
BYLINE: Samantha Coit Of the NEWS Staff
BODY:
BLUE HILL -- Residents here and in surrounding towns vowed to
fight to the bitter end Atlantic Salmon of Maine's proposal to
raise nearly a million Atlantic salmon off the coast of Long
Island.
Organized opposition to the Fairfield-based company's plan to
raise 896,000 fish off the western side of Long Island has mounted
since the group first formed, with attendance reaching
approximately 150 at Tuesday night's meeting -- including surprise
visitors from Atlantic Salmon of Maine.
"We can stop the polarization," said company manager Desmond
Fitzgerald, who extended an invitationto the group to visit salmon
farms. "Don't tar us with the same brush you tar everyone else
with," he said before the group silenced company representatives by
not inviting them to speak.
"This is not the place for it," said Brooklin resident Dorothy
Hayes. "We are not against sensible farming anywhere. Blue Hill
Bay simply is not the place for a salmon farm. "
The surprise visit did not derail the group's momentum in
planning how to stop the company from gaining an exclusive right to
raise nearly a million Atlantic salmon in a system of pens covering
a 1,936-by-600-foot tract in Blue Hill Bay.
"We're up against Goliath. Get your slingshots up and get
ready," said Ronald Lesko, meeting facilitator.
A Friends of Blue Hill Bay panel consisting of residents, legal
counsel, a research specialist, and development, press and outreach
coordinators briefed the group on Friends of Blue Hill Bay's
financial status, environmental concerns, legal issues surrounding
the application, and what individuals can do to stop Atlantic
Salmon of Maine's efforts to expand operations in Blue Hill Bay.
The Friends of Blue Hill Bay group has retained an
environmental lawyer, James Kilbreth, from a Portland-based firm.
The Friends group said Tuesday they are prepared to appeal a lease,
should the Department of Marine Resources and the Army Corps of
Engineers grant it. The Department of Marine Resources must act on
the application by Aug. 13. The Friends' group is urging the Army
Corps of Engineers to accept new data concerning environmental
impacts on two proposed Blue Hill Bay lease sites.
The group's scientific research coordinator, Susan Shaw of the
Brooklin-based Marine Environmental Research Institute, cited
concerns about water temperature and current flow, the amount of
dissolved oxygen, and impact on wildlife at the proposed site and
its general suitability for a salmon farm. The group is now
researching site features with a University of Maine professor.
A site review conducted by the Department of Marine Resources
states that the maximum rate of water moving through the proposed
site area is "very low," or two to three times lower than salmon
net pen sites in Maine.
Friends of Blue Hill Bay urged residents to reinvigoratea
letter-writing campaign to local and state representatives, U.S.
Sens. Olympia Snowe and Susan Collins, and government organizations
involved in lease application and permitting, and Atlantic Salmon
of Maine directly.
State Rep. Royce Perkins told the group a decision on the fish
farming proposal would be "a political decision" and that concerned
people should write to state senators.
Others attending the meeting suggested boycotting Atlantic
salmon.
"I suggest that we boycott, period," said Mary Hartley of the
Blue Hill Inn.
After the meeting, Atlantic Salmon of Maine's Fitzgerald, who
described himself as an environmentalist, said he came to the
meeting to start a dialogue with residents. Expanding operations in
Blue Hill Bay, he said, would not increase the company's overall
production, but would enable the company to improve husbandry
practices.
Established in 1987, Atlantic Salmon of Maine is owned by New
York-based Continental Grain Co., Chestnut Hill, Mass.-based
Seabord Corp., and two Norwegians who started the business. Annual
sales in 1998 totaled approximately $ 30 million.
(7) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning outbreak
Date: Tue, 20 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
-----------------------------------------------------
The following stories on the closure of 8,000 square miles of shellfishing
grounds off Scotland due to Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning may be of interest.
In Europe, where there seems to be monthly food scares, this one and its
possible link to salmon farming should be thoroughly researched.
__________________________________________________
PLEASE NOTE NEW CONTACT INFORMATION BELOW
__________________________________________________
-------------Forwarded Message from Connie Murtagh:
Copyright 1999 Associated Newspapers Ltd.
MAIL ON SUNDAY
July 18, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 45
LENGTH: 456 words
HEADLINE: Poisoned scallops in 'BSE of the seas' scare;
fish; food; health
BYLINE: Fidelma Cook
BODY:
SHELLFISH contaminated with a poison that can cause irreversible brain
damage and even death have been found off Scotland's West Coast.
Last night, as scientists worked frantically to ensure nothing slips
into
the food chain, alarmed experts claimed that Britain was sitting on a
'toxic
timebomb' that could lay waste the seas.
They demanded a Government inquiry warning that the crisis could do the
same
damage to the seafood industry as BSE did to beef.
More than 8,000 square miles of fishing grounds, home to the finest
scallops, have now been put off-limits - a world record closure for such a
case.
ASP - Amnesic Shellfish Poisoning - killed 20 people in Canada in a
recent
outbreak. There is no known antidote. Victims experience severe sickness
and
headaches followed by numbness and memory loss.
A condition similar to Alzheimer's disease follows, which can lead to
an
agonising death from asphyxiation.
Fishermen and environmentalists blame the contamination - four times
the
permitted EU level - on ammonia effluent from Scottish salmon farms. They
claim
it is 'feeding' naturally occurring algae which produce the toxin.
Algae expert Alan Berrie said last night: 'This is a disastrous
situation
and needs an immediate Government inquiry.
'The algae which produce the toxin do occur naturally in coastal waters
but
there is no history of toxicity associated with this before 1987 when an
outbreak in Canada caused the death of four people.
'Do people have to die before action is taken? High levels of ammonia
appear
to be to blame.
Salmon farms are the biggest source of ammonia on the West Coast. It
has
been estimated that the discharge from salmon farms to Scottish waters at
the
height of summer equals that from the raw sewage produced by a population
of
over seven million.' Friends of the Earth's marine research officer Don
Staniford said: 'We need an immediate inquiry into the whole state of
Scotland's
coastal environment. Unless something is done we are sitting on a toxic
time-bomb.
'The local scallops are now off the menu at restaurants nationwide. At
Glasgow's famous Rogano Seafood restaurant, chef David Clunas said: 'We
face a
tragedy unless action is taken. That would be the only word for the loss
of
this
fine produce.' Scallop fishermen's spokesman Hugh Allen said last night:
'We
believe there is sufficient evidence to warrant detailed research into the
effects on the environment by the discharge from fish farms. It is giving
us
great cause for concern.' Bill Crowe, of the Scottish Salmon Growers'
Association branded as 'absolute rubbish' allegations that the industry
was to
blame. But he said he would also welcome an inquiry to dispel the claims.
GRAPHIC: CRISIS: SCALLOP FLEET LEADER HUGH ALLEN IS DEMANDING AN INQUIRY
LOAD-DATE: July 20, 1999
Copyright 1999 The Scotsman Publications Ltd.
The Scotsman
July 19, 1999, Monday
SECTION: Pg. 7
LENGTH: 715 words
HEADLINE: SHOCK BAN ON SHELLFISH FARMING
BYLINE: Katrina Tweedie
BODY:
THE SCOTTISH shellfish farming industry is in jeopardy after
potentially
lethal toxins were found in scallops for the first time, prompting the
world's
biggest closure of a fishing area.
Now the multi-million pound industry and hundreds of jobs are under
threat
with more than 8,000 square miles of Scotland's western seaboard barred to
scallop fishermen.
Large amounts of amnesic shellfish poisoning (ASP) toxins have been
found in
scallops. In the worst case, the condition can cause irreversible brain
damage.
The discovery by government scientists last week has forced the
Scottish
executive to close fishing waters from the Western Isles to Cape Wrath
down to
Jura and across to Lewis, Barra and the islands of Coll, Tiree and Mull.
Environmentalists have described it as a "toxic time bomb" which is
threatening the livelihood of hundreds of fishermen.
There are more than 300 registered shellfish farmers in Scotland and
more
than two-thirds are said to be affected and unable to collect the
much-prized
queen and king scallops, a delicacy sent all over Europe.
Alan Berrie, the former chairman of the Shellfish Growers Association,
described the ban as "devastating" and added: "This could put hundreds of
fisherman out of jobs.
The fishing industry has already suffered from several scares and this
is
not only severely inconveniencing for them but the financial losses could
be
huge."
A recognised expert in toxic and harmful algae, Mr Berrie blames over
-productive salmon farming for introducing the toxin ASP into the once
pristine
Scottish water.
His claims have been backed by the environmental campaign group Friends
of
the Earth.
"ASP is caused by high levels if ammonia and salmon farmers discharge
tonnes
of untreated waste, which includes ammonia, into the ocean," said Don
Staniford,
a FoE marine research officer.
The Scottish salmon industry produced 120,000 tonnes of salmon last
year and
about 50,000 tonnes of by-products, which contain ammonia.
Mr Staniford said: "This outbreak points increasingly to the damage
done by
intensive salmon farming. The coincidence between the areas affected by
ASP and
high densities of salmon farms is remarkable."
Environmental campaigners have accused the Government of trying to
cover up
the crisis after the Scottish executive released a brief and low-key
statement
about the ban.
Now they are calling for a full, and open, investigation to establish
how
large quantities of the toxin, which naturally is only found in small
amounts,
came to be found.
Scientists in Aberdeen studying the more common paralytic shellfish
poisoning (PSP) and diarrhetic shellfish poisoning (DSP) first found the
toxin
three years ago in mussels. The toxin builds up in algae which lies at the
bottom on the seabed, where feeding scallops are found.
If the shellfish containing the toxin are eaten, victims can experience
severe sickness and headaches, vomiting, limb numbness and memory loss. In
a
recent outbreak in Canada 150 people were affected and four died.
In 1997 there were 46 tonnes of queen scallops harvested and 27 tonnes
of
king scallops and production and sales of the shellfish are worth more
than GBP
2 million annually.
Hans Unkles, a scallop fisherman from Tayvallich, Argyll, said: "The
day the
ban was introduced I came in with a full load of scallops on my boat and
realised I was not allowed to sell them. I have had no income since then
and
while I can cope without fishing for a few weeks, I would rather not."
Experts hope the toxin will break down naturally within a few weeks
allowing
the fishermen, who dredge the sea bed or dive for scallops, to go back to
work.
So far, only scallops appear to have been infected, but experts fear it
could
move up the food chain.
A Scottish executive spokeswoman said the ban was a precautionary
measure.
A statement said: "The action is based on scientific advice following
test
results from the Government's sampling programme. These tests showed that
the
ASP toxin has reached a level at which there is a risk to consumers. No
other
commercially marketed shellfish are affected by the action."
No-one was available to comment from the Scottish Salmon Growers'
Association.
LANGUAGE: ENGLISH
LOAD-DATE: July 20, 1999
(8) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Chairman of the Norwegian Fish Farmers' Association comments on Infectious Salmon Anemia
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
__________________________________________________
From: Norway
>From IntraFish:
Skeptical Norwegians
"My own personal opinion is that an eradication policy
wont't work, and
the government and the industry must be more pragmatic."
07/22/99 07:00
This is what Mr Tarald Sivertsen, chairman of the Norwegian
Fish Farmers'
Association says in an interview with Fish Farming Today.
Mr Sivertsen was asked about his opinion of the ISA crisis
in Scotland and how it is
currently being handled.
"We have lived with ISA for over 10 years in Norway, and we
tried to eridicate it
at first, but as we don't know how it infects, we must
accept it and control it. It is
nessecary to have a strict hygiene regime, one year class
per site and fallow sites,"
Mr Sivertsen said.
Commenting on the same issue in Fish Farming International,
Mr Asbjorn Reinkind,
MD of Hydro Seafood, says that it is impossible to
eradicate the ISA virus, which
has its natural reservoir in the sea. "You find the virus
in wild fish too, so
eradication policy is stupid. We were told we had to kill
the fish on-site, which is
the worst thing you can do. It is much better to take it to
the processing plant
where we can treat it. The Scottish Office interpreted the
rules in the worst
possible way. SO has to change the practice and adjust. If
not, nobody will risk
putting smolt to sea or be willing to invest in Scotland"
Mr Reinkind sais.
He also sais that the Scottish industry today is not
competitive because of the
complexities of getting sites and approval to use new
medicines.
(9) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Tasmanian Salmonid Growers Association upset about allowing import of uncooked Canadian salmon
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From: Australia
From: FIS (Fish Info Service)
SALMON FARMERS PROTEST OVER IMPORTS
(AUSTRALIA, Friday, July 23, 1999)
The Tasmanian Salmonid Growers Association says
salmon farmers are pledging to ignite a salmon war,
including a massive blockade of Federal Parliament, in a
bid to revert the recent AQIS ruling, which allows imports of
uncooked Canadian salmon to enter the country.
The association has asked the Federal Government to
guarantee compensation for the impacts of any disease
outbreaks as farmers feel the AUS$100-million-a-year
industry is now under threat.
The State Government is continuing to examine ways to
block the import of salmon, which can carry more than 20
diseases, to the state under quarantine or inland fisheries
laws.
However, some feel that the moves may only be able to
restrict movement across state borders and not imports
from overseas.
Tasmanian Liberal senator Paul Calvert revealed he was
considering legislation to ensure the industry would be
compensated if there were a disease outbreak.
(10) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Meanwhile, NZ salmon farmers celebrate an end to Australia's 24-year ban on salmon imports
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From: New Zealand
New Zealand news from The Press - July 21, 1999
Salmon industry hooks market
WELLINGTON -- The salmon
industry in New Zealand
is celebrating the lifting of
Australia's 24-year ban on
salmon imports, opening up a
potential $20 million market.
New Zealand has been exporting
smoked salmon valued
about $1 million a year to
Australia for several years, as
Australia allowed imports of
heat-treated and cooked
salmon. But it has been unable to
export fresh (chilled) or
frozen salmon, for which there is
a much bigger market.
Acting Minister for International
Trade John Luxton
yesterday welcomed the news. "It
takes the development
of trans-Tasman trade a step
further under the CER." A
pleasing aspect of the decision
was the recognition it
accorded to New Zealand salmon's
good health status, Mr
Luxton said.
Australian salmon producers are
criticising the decision as
equivalent to allowing
foot-and-mouth disease into
Australia and say it will
devastate their native salmon.
The Australian Quarantine
Inspection Service confirmed
that chilled and frozen salmon
would be allowed into
Australia under strict control.
The New Zealand salmon industry
estimates there are
potential sales worth $20 million
available in Australia for
fresh and frozen salmon through
growth in the Australian
market. -- NZPA
(11) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Regulation of Scottish fish farming industry questioned
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From: Scotland
Copyright 1999 Scottish Media Newspapers Limited
The Herald (Glasgow)
July 13, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 16
LENGTH: 493 words
HEADLINE: Accommodating' the fish-farmers
BODY:
THE Scottish Executive, formerly the Scottish Office, has yet again
"accommodated" its fish-farming chums by delaying implementation of
European
Union culling regulations on a Shetland site where the disease infectious
salmon anaemia (ISA) has been confirmed (July 9).
Its reason for doing so was to allow the owner of the fish, Kinloch
Damph
Ltd of Couldoran, near Kishorn in Wester Ross, to harvest and market them
before
they had to be destroyed and ensiled (minced up and burned). Otherwise,
the
company reportedly threatened to sue the Scottish Executive for
compensation for
loss of income.
Government Ministers, and their scientists, tell the public that ISA is
not
a risk to human health. But similar assurances, given by Ministers and
their
scientists during the BSE crisis, were eventually shown to be worthless.
Is
this happening again, with farm salmon?
Consumers buy farm salmon from their local supermarket on the basis of
trust. They do not know, and are not told, whether or not these fish could
contain traces of dioxins; whether or not the fish have come from farms
infected
with ISA; or, as is the case with some Asda and Safeway salmon products,
come
from a farm where the toxic organophosphate chemical, Ivermectin, is
licensed
for use.
Nothing on product packaging informs customers about these matters.
Product
packaging does not even tell customers that they are buying farm salmon,
or
which farm produced the fish. There is no information about which
chemicals
have
been used in rearing the fish. Customer choice is directed solely by
advertising
phrases such as "fresh Scottish salmon" and, often, a "Tartan Quality"
sticker
on the outside wrapper. Personally, I wouldn't feed farm salmon to my cat,
let
alone consider for a moment eating it myself.
The Kinloch Damph managing director, Mark Pattinson, blames wild fish
for
the spread of ISA - which was almost certainly imported to Scotland via a
Norwegian-owned freshwater smolt (immature salmon) hatchery at Eskadale to
the
north of Inverness. But there is no record anywhere in the world of wild
fish
dying because of ISA.
However, he is partly correct. Sea-trout are thought to host the
disease and
in their marine phase, sea-trout remain in coastal waters. As such, they
could
possibly carry ISA to nearby "fish-ghetto" salmon cages.
Not, however, for much longer. Sea-lice infestation from salmon farms
is
killing wild sea-trout (and wild salmon) and they are now on the point of
extinction in fish-farming areas in the West Highlands of Scotland.
The truth of the matter is that the salmon-farming industry, and the
regulation of the industry, are a complete shambles. The only remaining
question
seems to be whether or not the Scottish Executive First Minister, Donald
Dewar,
will do anything about it, to protect public health and to save Scotland's
wild
salmonids.
Bruce Sandison,
Hysbackie, Tongue, by Lairg.
July 12.
LOAD-DATE: July 21, 1999
(12) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Inquiry to investigate the use of insecticide Ivermectin in Scotland
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From: Scotland
Copyright 1999 Scottish Media Newspapers Limited
The Herald (Glasgow)
July 12, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 1
LENGTH: 516 words
HEADLINE: Fish farms face public inquiry on bid to use toxic insecticide
BYLINE: Craig Watson
BODY:
EXCLUSIVE
A PUBLIC inquiry is to be held to investigate the use of a toxic
insecticide
by beleaguered fish farmers.
First Minister Donald Dewar made the decision after calling in for his
consideration applications for the use of the insecticide Ivermectin for
farmed
salmon, the Scottish Executive has confirmed.
The inquiry will relate to 13 applications to discharge Ivermectin,
used to
treat deadly sea lice infestations at 12 Highland fish farms. It has been
linked
with damage to human health and the environment.
Industry leaders are understood to be concerned that the move, which
dates
back to 1996, will cause further delays for businesses already under
severe
pressure. It is the first time such a forum has been established to
scrutinise
the industry.
Anglers and conservationists are certain to use it as a platform to
discuss
wider issues of pollution and damage to the environment, including the
infectious salmon anaemia crisis which has led to the destruction of more
than
four million fish, huge financial losses, and job cuts.
The decision emerged in Scottish Executive letters sent out to
interested
parties last week. Under the Control of Pollution Act, Mr Dewar could have
chosen to deal with the matter by written submissions.
An Executive spokesman said a single inquiry would cover all 13
applications. It was not yet known when that would take place. He said Mr
Dewar,
who called in the matter as Scottish Secretary five months ago, decided a
public
inquiry was needed "to look at all the issues".
Ivermectin, used to treat other animals and on foreign salmon farms,
acts on
the nervous system of parasites, causing paralysis and death. There are no
proven effects on human health, though campaigners have claimed it could
cause
severe stomach complaints. Traces have been found in supermarket-sold
salmon
and, in 1997, two chains refused to stock fish treated with Ivermectin.
Anglers claim sea lice spreads from farmed salmon to wild fish,
particularly
sea trout. Mrs Jane Wright, president of the Scottish Anglers' National
Association and chairwoman of the Sea Trout Group (STG), said there were
fears
that stocks of wild fish could be wiped out if urgent action were not
taken. She
added: "We are delighted at this decision because we are totally opposed
to the
use of Ivermectin.
"You can't just go on putting large amounts of pollution into the water
without it affecting the marine environment."
STG members said in February they would take legal action against the
Scottish Environment Protection Agency (Sepa) to force the watchdog to
take
responsibility for sea lice control. Sepa has given the use of Ivermectin
the
go-ahead. A Sepa spokesman said small quantities of the chemical had been
used
at eight of the country's 300 fish farms. A further 22 applications have
been
refused, he added.
A spokesman for the Scottish Salmon Growers' Association (SSGA) said it
was
still considering its response. He said salmon farmers were not concerned
about
public scrutiny, adding that they believed Ivermectin was safe.
LOAD-DATE: July 21, 1999
(13) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Scottish anglers challenge salmon farming industry
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From: Scotland
Copyright 1999 Scottish Media Newspapers Limited
The Sunday Herald
July 4, 1999
SECTION: Pg. 21
LENGTH: 611 words
HEADLINE: Anglers lock rods with the fish farmers
BYLINE: Richard Bath
BODY:
Over the past 30 years, coastal netting, the decimation of feeding
grounds
in Greenland by Russian and Taiwanese drift-netting factory ships and the
impact
of power stations sited on migratory rivers have all contributed to a
steady
decline in salmon stocks, but now the fly-fishing community faces a test
even
bigger than Greenland's current flaunting of NASCO's guidelines.
The Scottish Anglers' National Association (Sana), who represent
150,000
Scottish anglers, are leading efforts to overturn the Scottish Office's
decision to offer L9 million aid to fish farms hit by the disastrous
outbreak of ISA
(Infectious Salmon Anaemia). It is, says Sana, "an unjust an
environmentally
unsound proposal with no public benefit".
Sana argue that until the salmon-farming industry can be
environmentally and
economically sustainable, it should not get a penny of taxpayers' money.
Under
the guise of the European Anglers Alliance, Sana are lobbying EC
commissioner
Alessandro Piccioli, urging him to veto the planned assistance. As any aid
requires his approval, Sana's decision has brought the festering war of
words
between anglers and fish farmers into the open.
The root of the problem is money and jobs in Scotland's rural economy.
The
fish farming industry employs up to 6,000 Scots, a number in decline, but
Sana
claim that at least 15,000 people, from gillies to tackle shops to hotels,
live
off the angling industry.
Sana have a point. Back in 1989, the McKay Report estimated the
industry's
annual income at L50 million; today that figure is nearer L65 million. In
contrast to fish farming, angling is a largely grant-free, self-sustaining
industry.
"We are not against fish farming," said Sana's Patrick Fotheringham,
"but we
are against unsustainable fish farming. We want to see healthy stocks of
wild
fish in our rivers along with a sustainable salmon-farming industry with a
long-term future. Pouring tax-payers' money into the existing
disease-ridden
industry is no way to achieve that."
The argument has been a lopsided one. The salmon-farmers, who have had
to
destroy four million infected fish, not only have the powerful economic
argument
of jobs on their side, but they also provide a source of not
inconsiderable
income for the government via the Crown Estates Commission, who lease the
land.
Sana say that until the fish farming industry overcomes its chronic
lack of
regulation - and NASCO's Oslo Resolution, the Control of Pollution Act
1974 and
the Environment Act 1995 are properly enforced - it should get no leeway
and no
cash.
Sana say the industry needs overhauling not refinancing. The outbreak
is due
to the illegal importation of live fish from Norway - seven of the 10
worst
infected sites belong to a Norwegian company - and why should the EC give
money
to an industry which is 47% owned by nationals from a non-EC country?
Both Sana and the salmon-farmers are turning up the pressure. Sana have
taken on two full-time officials, while officials at the Scottish Office
are
besieged by companies with next year's smolts ready but with no quarantine
-free
pens to put them in.
The fish-farmers want aid and the regulations loosened so they do not
have
to destroy infected fish. There are also plans to branch out into
producing
cod,
halibut and other indigenous seafish on an industrial basis. Little or no
research into the environmental effects has been done, and we all know
what
happened last time that was the case.
That seems sure to cause a new battle royal, but as one old Sana hand
said,
"it's going to be bloody, but at least we might get a conclusion to this
once
and for all."
LOAD-DATE: July 21, 1999
(14) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Outbreak of ISA in Chile denied
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From: Chile
No evidence of the existence of the disease has been detected so far
EXPERTS DENY ISA OUTBREAK
(CHILE, Friday, July 16, 1999)
Experts in fish health deny recent rumours about a possible
outbreak of infectious salmon anaemia (ISA) in Chile.
Chief of Senarpesca´s fish health department Ines Montalva
has assured that so far, the presence of the disease has
not been officially confirmed, reports Estrategia.
According to Eduardo Bitran, managing director of
Fundacion Chile, these kind of rumours cause great
damage to Chile´s salmon industry. He said that the
foundation carries out continuous monitoring controls to
evaluate the industry´s health conditions and he affirmed
that no evidence of the existence of the disease has been
detected.
The infectious salmon anaemia has already caused high
mortality rates in other countries, including Norway,
Scotland and Canada.
Bitran explained that ISA is sometimes confused with
another disease called "skeleton deformation", the cause of
which has not yet been determined, although it is known
that it is not caused by virus or bacteria and therefore, it is
not an infectious disease. However, he affirmed that this
problem only affects a reduced number of companies and
that it is believed that it could be caused by maladjustment
of some factors that are set in the production area, such as
temperature and water oxygenation.
(15) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Report on Maine salmon farming expansion proposal from an agribusiness angle
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From: USA
>From the Agribusiness Examiner, Issue # 42, July 23, 1999:
AS CORPORATE AGRIBUSINESS GOES SO GOES MAINE?
People living in Hancock County, Maine are concerned about a possible
increase in water-borne garbage and they have every right to be since
such a problem already exists in nearby Washington County, home of
Atlantic Salmon of Maine (ASOM) a Fairfield, Maine-based salmon farming
company.
Currently ASOM operates salmon farming facilities in Washington County,
and are planning to expand their operation to the Blue Hill Bay area in
Hancock County.
At an April 15 hearing ASOM presented the necessary plans and research
necessary to acquire a permit for their Blue Hill operation. They also
explained plans unrelated to the lease process: They intend to transport
fish and feed by barge from their Washington County location, and to
process the Blue Hill salmon at their Machias, Maine facility.
They also indicated they will attempt to keep the area free of garbage.
The lease, however, is not contingent on these plans being carried out
as ASOM has no legal agreement with anyone to prevent garbage
accumulating on area beaches.
The fact that this has already been a problem in their Washington county
facility is underscored by the fact that the majority ownership of ASOM
is held by two of the United States' largest agribusiness companies,
Continental Grain Company and Seaboard Corporation.
Continental, with its subsidiary Premium Standard, and Seaboard
Corporation, both with their corporate hog facilities and cattle
feedlots scattered throughout the Midwest already have a very poor
reputation for being odorous neighbors and repeatedly degrading the
environment.
Thus, considering the reputation these two companies have, their lack of
accountability in the fact that both companies are privately-held with
no community control over how they operate, the citizens of Hancock
County have every reason to be concerned about allowing these two
corporate agribusiness giants to move into their area.
(16) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Genetically modified foods, including salmon
Date: Fri, 23 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From: Canada
PUBLICATION Times Colonist (Victoria)
DATE Sun 18 Jul 1999
EDITION FINAL
SECTION/CATEGORY Science
PAGE NUMBER C3
BYLINE Karen Hsu
STORY LENGTH 1499
HEADLINE: Brave new world of food: Genetically modified foods are safe, scientists insist -- others aren't so sure
When an agriculture company introduced a genetically modified
tomato with a longer shelf life in 1994, it was the start of a new
revolution in food. Scientists and food producers promised that
other enhanced foods -- packed with richer flavour, extra vitamins
and even medicines -- would soon follow.
In a scenario out of science fiction, they predicted a day in the
near future when a banana, for example, could be spliced with a
hepatitis B viral gene for use as a vaccine.
The ``Flavr Savr'' tomato, though, was a commercial flop, and the
promised revolution seemed to go undergound. Today in the U.S.,
you don't hear too much about genetically altered foods and you
certainly can't find any obvious signs of them on grocery shelves.
But look again. Because nearly 60 per cent of all processed foods
-- everything from pickles to peanut butter -- contain corn or
soybeans that have been grown with genetically engineered seeds,
Americans are already dining regularly on DNA-altered cuisine,
probably without knowing it.
The deception, if it can be called that, is intentional. Efforts
to label foods with geneticially altered components have largely
failed out of a concern that illogical fears about scientifically
produced foods would unfairly harm a new and promising industry.
Yet the speed with which that industry has taken off with no
special regulatory oversight has even some scientists worried
about what the future may bring as more and more gene-tinkered
foods come to market.
What's a consumer to do?
Doomsayers have long feared that people could fall ill from
life-threatening allergic reactions to foreign material in foods,
and although this is a remote possibility, most scientists say it
is unlikely.
Farmers have been crossbreeding plants for centuries to produce
ones with desired traits. A trait -- whether it's of a plant or
animal -- is the expression of a gene, which contains the
molecular instructions that give organisms their characteristics,
such as a rounded leaf or brown eyes.
But unlike traditional plant breeding, which can only incorporate
genes from close relatives, genetic engineering can make use of
any gene regardless of its source, which means it is theoretically
possible to do what A/F Protein Inc., a Waltham-based company,
is
experimenting with now. Scientists there are inserting an
``anti-freeze'' flounder gene into an Atlantic salmon so that the
salmon could be bred in colder waters.
Many of the most important crops in the U.S. are already being
grown from seeds engineered with a built-in immunity to insects,
viruses, or herbicides. About a third of the 80 million acres of
corn planted in the nation, 55 per cent of the 72 million acres of
soybeans, and mor
e than half of the 13 million acres of cotton are
grown with genetically engineered seeds.
Scientists point out that genetically modified foods are not
harmful, because DNA -- in any food -- is destroyed during
digestion.
``There is no reason to suppose that DNA in genetically modified
plants would behave differently,'' said officials from the Royal
Society, the independent scientific academy of the United Kingdom,
in a report about genetically modified foods released last
September.
Susan Hefle, assistant professor and co-director of the Food
Allergy Research and Resource Program at the University of
Nebraska in Lincoln, said consumers should not worry about the use
of genetically engineered, or transgenic, ingredients in food
because there has been no discernable increase in allergies or
other problems since oils, flour and syrups from genetically
engineered foods -- such as corn and soy -- started being consumed
a few years ago.
``I would eat any products on the shelf,'' said Hefle.
But some critics of genetically modified foods point to Pioneer
Hi-Bred International Inc., a seed company, now owned by Dupont
Co., that in 1996 developed a transgenic soybean using a gene from
a Brazil nut to increase the protein content of its animal feed.
Though the product was never intended for human consumption,
Pioneer wanted to make sure the allergen from the Brazil nut was
not transferred to the soybean, so it asked Steve Taylor, a nut
allergy specialist at the University of Nebraska, to test the
product.
Taylor and his colleagues found that people did, in fact, have
allergies to the protein and published those results in a 1996
issue of the New England Journal of Medicine; Pioneer pulled the
soybean from production. ``It was never close to a disaster,''
said Carrol Bolen, vice-president at Pioneer.
Critics point out that it was fortunate that the company acted to
police itself; no federal agency prevented Pioneer from producing
the modified soybean.
But the product in question was animal -- not human -- feed. The
U.S. Food and Drug Administration does, in fact, require companies
to demonstrate through scientific data that potential allergens
are not contained in any bio-engineered foods; if they are, the
FDA requires a label saying so.
But most American consumers are pragmatic about food, caring about
taste and cost -- not about the food process, said Thomas Hoban, a
_
professor of sociology and food science at North Carolina State
University, who has been following consumer attitudes about
genetically engineered foods.
Hoban said that studies indicate that about 75 per cent of
American consumers are not concerned about genetically engineered
foods, mainly because they trust that the food supply is generally
safe.
But this was not true in the case of bovine growth hormone. In
1993, when the FDA approved genetically engineered bovine
somatotropin (BST), a protein-hormone involved in milk production,
people were up in arms.
Dairy farmers use the hormone so cows produce more milk. The
National Institutes of Health has said BST is not a human health
hazard because milk already contains the hormone naturally and it
is a protein digested in the intestines.
However, some critics, such as Jason Boehk, co-founder of
Cambridge-based Protect Organic, have requested that food with
genetically engineered ingredients be labelled because they
believe people should have the choice of avoiding them.
``Using genes to manipulate food can have unintended consequences.
What happens if there is a problem? Without labelling, there is
just no way to know how to trace it back to the genetically
engineered ingredient,'' Boehk said.
One concern is the use of a bacterial protein from Bacillus
thuringiensis (Bt) in crops such as corn, soybeans, and potatoes.
The Bt gene is inserted into the seeds of many crops to produce a
protein that acts as a pesticide. When the plant is eaten by an
insect, the bug dies.
Because the seed contains a pesticide, the Environmental
Protection Agency has evaluated it for safety and it's come up
clean. And studies have shown that Bt is not toxic to mammals,
even at the highest dose tested, and that the proteins rapidly
degrade in the stomach acid.
Another concern is that ``marker genes'' are routinely inserted
into plants to make them resistant to antibiotics, which helps
scientists identify the plants that have been altered. Critics
suggest that bacteria in people's or animals' intestines may be
able to pick up those genes from digested food and perhaps
accelerate the evolution of antibiotic-resistant microbes.
But scientists say the marker gene product is broken down in the
digestive tract and thus cannot function in the human body.
Supporters of the technology emphasize that processes are safe and
the regulatory system works. In 1992, the FDA issued a statement
that foods grown from genetically engineered seeds would be
regulated the same way as other foods but that there was no need
to label them because the end product is the same.
James Maryanski, biotechnology co-ordinator for foods for the FDA,
said if a food proved to be unsafe, it would be pulled off the
market and action would be taken against the company.
``We can't guarantee that we know everything about the products,''
Maryanski said. But he added that food companies do go through
extensive internal and government reviews.
Nevertheless, Laura Ticciati, executive director of Iowa-based
Mothers of Natural Law, is worried about the long-term safety of
genetically modified foods.
``If 90 to 95 per cent of food in the next five to 10 years will
become genetically modified, there needs to be some serious
long-term safety testing done. We thought DDT was safe 20 years
ago,'' said Ticciati. ``In the meantime, food should be labelled
so every American has the right to decide if they want to put
themselves in the experiment.''
Elliot Entis, chief executive of the Waltham company
that's
inserting flounder genes into salmon, said he knows that the major
hurdle will be convincing consumers that genetically modified fish
are safe. ``It does come down to consumer acceptance, which I
think will be there,'' Entis said.
But Bolen of Pioneer acknowledged that there are still unknowns in
the evolving industry.
``The technology is developing at such a rapid pace, it is hard to
visualize what we may be able to do down the road.'' said Bolen.
(17) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Research on flounder aquaculture
Date: Thursday, July 8, 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail Address:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
Organization: *Ocean Awareness Campaign* and *SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
From ENN, USA:
Feel like flounder tonight?
Groundbreaking research
by scientists at the
University of North
Carolina at Wilmington
may help keep flounder on
your dinner menu.
Aquaculturist Wade O.
Watanabe at the Center for
Marine Science Research
at the University of North
Carolina at Wilmington has
made a breakthrough in
producing flounder for
large-scale saltwater fish
farming. In a controlled
environment, southern flounder were spawned naturally
with no hormone
induction.
Flounder, a popular flatfish whose numbers are
declining in our oceans,
was one of the top ten fish consumed in the U.S.
according to a National
Fisheries Institute survey in 1997. According to
Watanabe, Summer
flounder populations declined from 23.5 thousand
metric tons in the
mid-1980s to 9 thousand metric tons in the early
'90s.
"If you inject fish with hormones you have to
physically handle them. That
can cause stress on the fish and impair the spawning
process," Watanabe
said. "Our operation shows that you can take wild
adult broodstock out
of the ocean and provide the conditions necessary for
them to spawn
naturally that same year."
Natural spawning involves, "creating conditions in
the tank that mimic the
natural season progressions to get the fish to
spawn," said Watanabe.
Dr. Harry Daniels, a larval culture specialist at
North Carolina State
University, supplied wild adult southern flounder,
obtained through
commercial sources, for the project. Dr. John Burke
of the National
Marine Fisheries Service in Beaufort also donated
broodstock for the
study.
"Larval culture is Harry's expertise," said Watanabe.
"Unlike freshwater
fish (catfish, trout, tilapia), culturing larvae of a
marine finfish like flounder
is technically demanding. Freshwater fish produce
large eggs with a lot of
yolk. By the time the yolk is eaten, freshwater fish
are developed enough
to be fed a commercial fish chow. That's why
freshwater aquaculture is
well established, whereas, marine aquaculture is
still in the embryonic
stages. Marine finfish produce small eggs with small
yolks. When their
yolk is used up, they must be fed microscopic algae
and zooplankton. The
upshot is that the requirement for these tiny
organisms is a difficult task to
meet."
With this breakthrough accomplished, Watanabe and
Daniels are
modifying the nutrition of broodstock and
environmental parameters such
as temperature and light to improve fertilization and
survival of southern
flounder eggs to the first-feeding larval stage.
"This is another alternative that will be helpful to
overall hatchery
production of flounder," Watanabe said. "While this
is a major step, we're
still a long way from being able to produce in all
seasons of the year the
quality of (flounder) that would be needed for a
commercial industry."
Copyright 1999, Environmental News Network, All Rights Reserved
(18) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Poaching in Kamchatka, Russia
Date:
Sun, 25 Jul 1999 11:33:14 +0900 (JST)
From:
E.Noguchi
To:
Yutaka Okamoto
Forwarded by E. Noguchi
----------------
Original message follows
----------------
From: misha
To: PRiggs@rbf.org, siberia@foejapan.org
Date: Sun, 25 Jul 1999 11:11:06 +1100
Subject: POACHING IN KAMCHATKA
copyright The Moscow Times 1997-1999
TMT: Thursday, July 15, 1999: In Kamchatka, 'Life Is All Poaching'Thursday, July 15,
1999
In Kamchatka, 'Life Is All Poaching'
By Richard C. Paddock
OKTYABRSKY, Far East -- From the beach where Vladimir Belov stands, he can see a
dozen ships
trawling for salmon in the Sea of Okhotsk. An unemployed plumber, Belov
can't afford a fishing license. In fact, he has never seen one. But that
doesn't keep him from fishing for salmon too.
With a watchful eye for the police, the 39-year-old father of two sets out
his homemade truba - a 20-foot pipe with a fishing net and floats attached
- and waits for the only good luck his life is likely to offer.
In this desolate, Godforsaken town near the southern tip of the Kamchatka
Peninsula, the residents have little to live on but the fish they catch
illegally. Local industry has collapsed. Crops refuse to grow in the sandy
soil. Stores have closed, and commerce is nearly nonexistent.
"Life is all about poaching," Belov says. "What do you think life is like
when you don't get paid at all? If someone gave us the money, we would be
out of here in no time."
Perched on the Pacific Rim about 1,100 kilometers from Japan, Kamchatka is
a land of missed opportunity - a lush region of wilderness and lakes held
back by seven decades of Communist dictatorship and seven years of
capitalist greed.
Its natural assets make it one of the richest regions in the country, but
Russia's poorly functioning economy provides little money to develop them.
Like the rest of Russia, prices in Kamchatka have skyrocketed, salaries
have plummeted and goods have become scarcer since last year's financial
collapse and ruble devaluation. During the winter, residents in the
capital, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatsky, shivered in near-freezing apartments
because there was not enough fuel to run the city's centralized heating
plants. In recent weeks, each household has received electricity for only
three hours every other day.
In Oktyabrsky, anyone who could manage it has moved away, leaving behind
only the destitute and the desperate.
"Life is so terrible here we're going to die like dogs," says a 20-year
Oktyabrsky resident who gives her name only as Yulia. "But before we die
like dogs, we're going to eat the dogs we have."
Kamchatka's economy has gone so haywire that much of its record 1998
salmon harvest went to waste. On the Bolshaya River near Oktyabrsky, dozens
of Soviet-style work brigades conducted the same kind of industrial fishing
operation they had for decades: Men in small motorboats placed their nets
in the river and pulled them tight with tractors on the beach, trapping
tons of fish at a time. Using cranes, they hauled the salmon out of the
river and loaded them onto trucks.
Later, workers sliced open the female fish and extracted the rich, red
caviar. But local canneries, run-down and poorly managed, could not process
most of the salmon. Trucks dumped an estimated 50,000 tons of salmon in
fields to rot.
As in Soviet times, fishing - legal or otherwise - dominates the region's
economy. Illegal fishing in Russia's Far East is estimated to bring in as
much as $5 billion a year, an amount equal to nearly one-fifth of Russia's
annual budget.
The biggest threat to the fishery comes from commercial ships that haul in
fish without regard to legal limits in the three bodies of water that
surround the peninsula: the Pacific Ocean, the Sea of Okhotsk and the
Bering Sea.
Officials say Russian vessels working out of Kamchatka, Vladivostok and
Sakhalin Island are depleting the region of crab, salmon and herring, among
other species.
To avoid fishing limits, steep taxes and stifling bureaucracy, Russian
ships commonly take their catch directly to Japan, where they can sell it
at premium prices. "A business that tries to operate legally and pay its
taxes cannot afford to stay in business," says Vladimir Burkanov, head of
the regional agency in charge of protecting fishing resources.
Russia's rich fishing grounds also lure ships from other nations to fish
illegally. Some pirate companies send several vessels at a time to fish
nonstop and a shuttle ship to meet up with them, take their haul and
deliver it to port.
While fishing remains the mainstay of Kamchatka's economy, officials are
wrestling with how to shape the region's future and tap into its wealth of
resources.
But harsh weather and a shortage of hotels make Kamchatka a tourist
destination only for the wealthiest - or hardiest - travelers. Even at the
height of the short summer tourist season, it is not unusual for
restaurants in Petropavlovsk to close at dinner time because the city water
supply has been shut off. To keep away cockroaches, one prominent hotel in
the capital is known to spray pesticides in guests' rooms while they are
out for the day.
For now, officials are investing little in tourist facilities and are
trying instead to attract cruise ship passengers, who have no need for
hotels, and big-game hunters, who expect to camp out.
Oktyabrsky, 150 kilometers west of Petropavlovsk, is as grim a town as any
in Russia. The main street - a treeless dirt road - is strewn with garbage
and lined by half-empty apartment blocks. The street is rutted and
undernourished children entertain themselves by jumping onto the backs of
trucks as they go by. Along the beach, dozens of men put their trubas into
the sea and wait for salmon to swim close to shore. On the best of days,
one truba can bring in a ton of fish. In a constant game of cat-and-mouse,
the men are ready to run at the first sign of the police, who frequently
come to issue fines and cut their nets.
"Whether or not you call it poaching, we don't have a choice," unemployed
crane operator Alexander Belashov, 31, says as he watches over his homemade
fishing rig. "We depend entirely on the sea. If we get some fish, we know
we're going to survive. If we don't, God knows what will happen."
(19) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Boston Globe: Proposed salmon farm sparks opposition
Date: Tue, 27 Jul 1999
From: bmott@seaweb.org
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
Following story in Boston Globe comes thanks to Howard Breen
__________________________________________________
From: the Boston Globe:
Proposed salmon farm sparks opposition in Blue Hill
By Associated Press, 07/26/99 02:16
But Atlantic Salmon of Maine, the state's largest aquaculture company, says
the $1.6 million project would make its fish farming operations healthier
and more productive, while stimulating the local economy by creating more jobs.
The company has applied for permits to raise hundreds of thousands of
salmon in pens off Long and Bartlett Islands. It would be the largest
salmon farm ever built on the Maine coast.
Company president Tom Royal said the sites were chosen for their deep water
and protection from storms. He said they will rarely interfere with lobster
fishing.
That concern has led lobstermen to join forces with town selectmen and
wealthy summer residents such as David Rockefeller Sr. in opposing the project. A
group called the Friends of Blue Hill Bay has attracted hundreds of
supporters and has launched a $50,000 fund-raising campaign to pay for scientific studies and legal advice.
The Long Island site would be 27 acres; the Bartlett Island site would be
16 acres.
''This thing is bigger than several football fields,'' said Patrick Wilmerding, chairman of the Friends of Blue Hill Bay. ''They're going to turn the bay into a feedlot.''
Royal said the pens would be used to hold some of the fish that are being
raised at three farms off Harrington and Machias, in Washington County.
Creating more room means less fish feces and uneaten food on the ocean
floor, and less transmission of diseases and parasites between generations, he
said.Use of pesticides to control parasites could also be reduced, he said.
''This is the result of long-term thinking about sustainable aquaculture,''
he said.
Tom Harnett, an assistant attorney general who gives legal advice to the
Department of Marine Resources, said a decision on the lease applications
should be made by mid-August.
The opposition to the project could be a sign of things to come as the
Maine aquaculture industry outgrows the state's more remote harbors and tries to
address environmental problems that are only growing more complex.
''I look at this as the flashpoint for what could be a statewide issue,''
The best sites in Washington County, where jobs are badly needed and
residents are more familiar with fish farming, have all been claimed. Those that
remain lie close to environmentally sensitive islands.
(20) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Nutreco Acquires fish feed business in Scotland
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
__________________________________________________
From IntraFish:
Nutreco Acquires fish feed business in Scotland
BOCM PAULS sold
Nutreco announces it has acquired the fish feed business of
BOCM
PAULS at Renfrew, Scotland. BOCM PAULS is the fourth
largest fish
feed producer in the UK.
07/29/99 08:00
The plant has a capacity of 25,000 tonnes and a sales
turnover of NLG 36 M.
"To secure adequate production capacity is a logical step
after we announced the
acquisition of the salmon farming and processing activities
of Marine Harvest
McConnell in Scotland and Chile earlier this month",
Business Group Managing
Director Aquaculture Hans den Bieman commented.
Nutreco recognises that BOCM PAULS Fish Feed Group has a
plant and
associated business skills which ideally complement their
existing UK operation
(Trouw Aquaculture) at two sites, Invergordon and
Longridge.
The acquisition of the BOCM PAULS Fish Feed Mill at Renfrew
will provide
Trouw Aquaculture with a location which is strategically
placed in relation to the
UK fish farming industry. The plant employs 35 people.
Nutreco Holding N.V. is an international company quoted on
the Amsterdam
Stock Exchange with leading positions in high-quality
animal and fish feed
industries. The Groups main activities centre on the
production of compound
feed for pigs, poultry and cattle as well as salmonid fish
feed. Other Nutreco
activities include the production of premixes and
speciality feed, poultry and pork
processing, pig and poultry breeding and salmon farming and
processing.
These activities are divided into Nutreco Agriculture (Agri
Nutrition and Animal
Products) and Nutreco Aquaculture. Thirteen business units
operate within these
groups, incorporating 80 production and processing plants
in over 15 countries.
Since its flotation in June 1997, Nutreco finalised
acquisitions in the Netherlands,
Spain, Germany, Canada, Poland, Chile, France, Portugal and
Scotland.
Nutrecos sales in 1998 amounted to NLG 5,433 million (EUR
2,465 million).
(21) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Australia`s salmon ban Canada fights back
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
>From IntraFish:
Australia`s salmon ban
Canada fights back
Canada said on Wednesday it has requested authority from
the World
Trade Organization (WTO) to retaliate against Australia for
its continued
ban on imports of Canadian salmon.
07/29/99 14:22
Trade spokesman Francois Lasalle said Australia contends
its revised import
policies, unveiled July 19, are now compliant with WTO
rule, but Canada does
not agree, Reuters reports.
- So there will be a panel established to determine whether
the revised fish import
policies of Australia are compliant or not with the WTO
ruling, and if the panel
finds against Australia, then Canada's request for
retaliation will be referred to
arbitration regarding the level of retaliation requested,
Lasalle said.
He said that a decision by the panel is not expected before
the end of the year,
adding: ``But in the meantime we are continuing discussions
with Australia on the
subject. Perhaps we can find some improvement to be made to
their July 19
announcement of revised policy.''
Canadian Trade Minister Sergio Marchi said in July that
Canada would impose a
surtax on imports of certain Australian products to
retaliate for the salmon ban,
which has been in force since 1975.
In 1998, a WTO panel ruled that Australia's ban was
scientifically unjustified and
discriminatory. In February 1999, after a failed appeal by
Australia, the WTO
gave Australia until July 6 to implement the WTO rulings.
Australia announced a
revised policy on July 19.
The United States has a similar WTO complaint against
Australia.
Source: Reuters
(22) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Shetland year 2000 will produce commercial halibut
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
From IntraFish:
Shetland year 2000
Commercial halibut
Three halibut farming sites could start operating in
Shetland in 2000.
07/29/99 07:00
A management plan for the inner Burra area has been drawn
up by the North
Atlantic Fisheries College, in collaboration with Shetland
salmon farms Crø Lax
and Hoove Salmon and up to three halibut farming sites
could start operating
there in 2000 - on sites previously designated for salmon
farming. Planning
applications have been lodged with the Shetland Islands
Council for approval of
halibut farming, reports the Shetland Fishing News.
Sourcing and acquiring juvenile halibut is the main problem
as they cost about £5
to £7 each on the market. The college already have a brood
stock established in
Cliff Sound and their hatchery in Scalloway is being
upgraded and extended. Old
stocks of salmon cages could be refurbished and converted
for halibut by making
them smaller and fitted with floatation and sinker tubes in
order to produce a flat
bottom in the net. Without a flat bottom, halibut - which
tend to swim in the
deeper waters of the cage - overcrowd the bottom of the
net.
(23) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Norway doubling farm salmon production
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
From IntraFish:
By 2005
Norway doubling production
An analysis by the Nordland Research Institute forecasts an
output of
700,000 tonnes of salmonids by 2005 - as being the result
of a 'middle
alternative' (a 9-10% growth p.a.) for the booming
Norwegian industry.
07/29/99 07:00
Indicators in place show that the potential is there but
the authors of the report
stress that more efforts should be spent on external
communications regarding the
industry's image in the public opinion on environmental
issues.
One of the main points stressed is that the industry will
need an institutional and
organisational framework to develop a balance between
production and market
demand. Which of the growth scenarios will apply will
partly be dependent on
what happens after the now two year old 'EU-Norway salmon
deal' comes to
term in 2002. Three scenarios were analysed considering low
(5-6%), moderate
(9-10%) and high (15%) growth per annum. In the most likely
event of a
moderate growth, 800,000 to 900,000 tonnes of feed would be
required, and
the capital value of the industry would increase from NOK
14 billion in 1997 to
NOK 22 billion in 2005.
(24) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Turbot Farming Introduced to Iceland
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
From Seafood.com:
Turbot Farming Introduced to Iceland
Seafood.com July 28- via Iceland press- A fish farm in Iceland is
introducing turbot this year. This is the
first time that this species of flatfish has been professionally farmed in
Iceland. The market for turbot in
Europe is very good and the fish sell for high prices. The fish farm,
Eyraeldi was granted an exemption
from the import ban on turbot on condition that the company follows strict
health security rules. The
business concept is to raise turbot fry at this farm, and then sell them to
other Icelandic fish farmers for
grow out.
(25) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: A new race of genetically modified salmon?
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
This comes thanks to Allan Berry:
Scottish Daily Mail, Thur July 29th 1999.
By DAVID DERBYSHIRE Science Correspondent
NOW ITS THE FRANKEN-FISH SECRET experiments on a new race of genetically
modified salmon have taken
place in Scotland, the Government admitted last night.
In a series of controversial tests, thousands of fish were given an extra
gene to
make them grow four times as quickly as normal. The admission by Scottish
Secretary Dr John Reid, that Ministers gave the go-ahead for the
Franken-fish studies three years ago provoked a furious reaction last night
from anti-GM campaigners. They accused the Government of covering up the
scale of genetic experiments and urged them to come clean on other GM
research
into animals. Anti-GM campaigners believe the experiments took place in
tanks
near Loch Fyne, Argyll, involving a Canadian company.
Dr Reids confirmation of the project means the Scottish Offièe licence for
the
experiments was granted during John Majors government. Studies into fast
growing genetically modified fish have been taking place in America and
Canada for the past few years. Although there were rumours of similar
experiments in Britain, the details remained under wraps until yesterday.
The salmon industry is looking for easy to farm fish, which can grow to
market
size in just 18 months - half the time it normally takes. That would
double the turnover
of salmon in tanks and potentially double profits.
Yesterday Dr Reid admitted: Copies of a growth hormone gene from Chinook
Salmon
were introduced into 10,000 Atlantic Salmon eggs. The fish were grown in a
land-based
containment facility for up to .one year. Approximately 50 per cent of the
fish grew at four
times. the normal rate with no sign of abnormalities. " The fish were
destroyed at the end
of the experiment and were not sold", he said. Former Labour Minister Joan
Ruddock,
who pressed Dr Reid for details about the research in a Parliamentary
question, said
she would be seeking more information. "The greatest concern for me is that
of genes
being transferred from one species to another", she said. There is clearly
a potential for
escapes into the wild.
Friends of the Earth spokesman Ian Willmore said: The Government needs to
come
clean about exactly what has been going on. We need to know exactly when
this took
place, where the research was carried out, whether any fish escaped into
the wild and
the results of these experiments. Its just another example of how the
genetic
modificatIon of crops and animals is taking place in secret.
American scientists have created more than 100,000 GM salmon in giant
seawater
tanks off the coast of the U.S. and Canada. They hope to get the first
grow-faster fish
on fishmongers slabs within two years. In America, the research into salmon
is being
carried out by the biotech firth A/F Protein Inc. The company say their
fish taste and
look like the normal variety. Other GM fish - including trout, flounder and
arctic char
are likely to follow.
Opponents fear salmon crossbreeding with wild fish could spread genetic
pollution
across the worlds oceans. If the grow-faster fish eat more, it could
drastically alter
the food..chain, affecting other species.
Arthur Bell, chairman of the Food Trust of Scotland, was horrified at the
prospect of
genetically modified salmon ending up on the plates of the public.
He said: I am seriously concerned to learn about this. I think it will be a
long time
before we can be. sure that genetically modified foods are definitely safe
for public
consumption. Im not sure if mankinds tampering with nature in this way can
ever be
advisable. Sadly these concerns will be shared by others and could damage
sales of farmed salmon in this country and overseas.
Salmon have been at the centre of several health scares over the last year
- with
farming practices blamed by many experts for putting human health at risk.
Last year millions of fish were culled after an outbreak of the incurable
disease
Infectious salmon anaemia. Some supermarkets pulled salmon from their
shelves amid fears the disease could affect people.
Salmon farmers have also, come under fire for using a pesticide Ivermectin,
used
to combat sea lice. Some expects fear that the poison could affect other
marine life
and might be harmful in large doses to humans.
Intensive salmon farming was linked to a massive poisoning outbreak which
forced
a curb on scallop farming across western Scotland this month. Fishing of
the shellfish
was banned in 8,000 square miles of sea after high levels of toxins
produced by
algae were found in scallop. Fisherman say that the algae is feeding off
high levels
of ammonia in the water, and that ammonia Is a by product of salmon
farming.
The Scottish Salmon Growers Association has dismissed the link as rubbish.
If salmon modification is a success, other animals will follow. According
to Home
Office figures, one million animals have been genetically modified for use
in scientific
experiments over the past four years.
The bulk of research involved mice and rats and was carried out in the hope
of
medical breakthroughs, but scientists are now turning to farm animals used
for food.
Around 2,408 pigs plus 1,309 sheep and even 42 birds, thought to be
chickens
and turkeys, were also modified.
(26 ) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: U.K.Controversy over Genetically Modified Salmon
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
From Seafood.com:
Controversy over Genetically Modified Salmon Erupts in U.K.
Seafood.com July 29 via BBC- Revelations in the House of Commons of
government support for a
Scottish Experiment with genetically modified salmon has caused an uproar
in Britain, where any hint of
genetic modification of foods is highly controversial.
In 1996, Otter Ferry Salmon carried out privately funded research in closed
tanks, after having obtained
government permission and support to do so. A growth gene from Chinook
salmon was put into 10,000
Atlantic salmon eggs. 50 individuals grew at 4 times the normal rate of
growth. The fish were kept for 18
months, and then destroyed.
The Scottish Salmon Association distanced itself from the experiments,
fearing a market backlash. At the
time, in 1996, the Scottish growers feared that this technology would be
adopted in Norway, to great
competitive advantage. Essentially the modification would allow salmon to
grow to market size in 12 to 18
months, rather than 3 years, halving the cost of production.
Since then, nine salmon growing countries agreed to a ban on genetically
modified fish, and there has been
no further interest in the project.
Nevertheless, the techniques have been established and they lay the
groundwork for a further dramatic
reduction in the cost of rearing farmed salmon. To what extent they ever
get adopted will depend on
whether there is market acceptance of genetically modified foods.
(27) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Atlantic Salmon Aquaculture in the EEZ
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
Subject:
Atlantic Salmon Aquaculture in the EEZ
Date:
Thu, 29 Jul 1999 17:21:10 -0400
From:
Bill Mott
Thanks to Gary Jensen at USDA for this information:
[Federal Register: July 27, 1999 (Volume 64, Number 143)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Page 40519-40521]
>From the Federal Register Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
[DOCID:fr27jy99-9]
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration
50 CFR Part 648
[Docket No. 990119022-9164-02; I.D. 111998C]
RIN 0648-AM13
Fisheries of the Northeastern United States; Amendment 1 to the
Atlantic Salmon Fishery Management Plan
AGENCY: National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS), National Oceanic and
Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Commerce.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: NMFS issues final regulations to implement Amendment 1 to the
Atlantic Salmon Fishery Management Plan (FMP). Specifically, these
final regulations establish a framework process to implement, add to or
adjust Atlantic salmon management measures to allow for Atlantic salmon
aquaculture projects in the exclusive economic zone (EEZ). Amendment 1
to the FMP also includes an overfishing definition for Atlantic salmon.
DATES: Effective August 26, 1999.
ADDRESSES: Copies of Amendment 1 and its regulatory impact review (RIR)
are available from Paul J. Howard, Executive Director, New England
Fishery Management Council, 5 Broadway, Saugus, MA 01906-1036.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Bonnie L. VanPelt, Fishery Management
Specialist, 978-281-9244.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: On November 13, 1998, the New England
Fishery Management Council (Council) submitted for review and
Secretarial approval an omnibus amendment that includes Amendment 11 to
the Northeast Multispecies FMP, Amendment 9 to the Sea Scallop FMP, and
Amendment 1 to the Atlantic Salmon FMP. The omnibus amendment was
approved in its entirety on March 3, 1999, and a notice of approval of
the omnibus amendment was published in the Federal Register on April
21, 1999 (64 FR 19503). A proposed rule to implement the aquaculture
framework process contained in Amendment 1 to the Atlantic Salmon FMP
was published on February 5, 1999 (64 FR 5754). The comment period on
the proposed rule closed March 22, 1999. No public comments were
received on the proposed rule. A complete discussion of Amendment 1's
provisions appears in the preamble to the proposed rule and is not
repeated here.
Approved Management Measures
Amendment 1 to the Atlantic Salmon FMP includes a new Atlantic
salmon overfishing definition and adds a mechanism to allow for
Atlantic salmon aquaculture in the EEZ through a framework adjustment
process. For a discussion of the Atlantic salmon overfishing
definition, see the notice of approval of the omnibus amendment (64 FR
19503, April 21, 1999).
Although salmon is overfished, no additional management measures
are imposed by Amendment 1. The management measures currently in place
prohibit harvesting of salmon from the EEZ and require that any
Atlantic salmon incidentally caught in other fisheries be released in a
manner that insures maximum probability of survival. These measures
have been determined to be sufficient to the extent practicable to
minimize bycatch and bycatch mortality consistent with national
standard 9.
The Northeast Fisheries Science Center certified the Council's
recommended overfishing definition with reservation noting that there
was no specified mortality limit or threshold projected for a rebuilt
stock, or stock size above which fishing mortality could be greater
than zero. However, the Center's conclusion was that in light of the
status of the Atlantic salmon resource and its long rebuilding
schedule, considerations of such biological reference points can be
addressed when, and if, necessary. Moreover, overfishing is not
occurring, as fishing mortality is zero and is expected to stay at zero
for the foreseeable future. The Council has been notified that should
the status of the resource change, it would need to revisit the
overfishing definition to clarify what level of fishing mortality is
appropriate to rebuild the resource to a sustainable level.
For the sake of efficiency, this rule establishes a framework
process to allow for implementation of aquaculture projects, which is
consistent with the process outlined for all other amendments now being
developed to bring New England and Mid-Atlantic Fishery Management
Council plans into compliance with the Sustainable Fisheries Act. This
action would allow for the implementation of aquaculture projects
through the adjustment of the management measures prohibiting the
harvest of Atlantic salmon from the EEZ and through the imposition of
one or more of the management measures identified in Amendment 1,
including, but not limited to: Minimum fish sizes, gear restrictions,
minimum mesh sizes, possession limits, tagging requirements, monitoring
requirements, reporting requirements, permit restrictions, area
closures, and establishment of special management areas or zones.
Classification
The Regional Administrator, Northeast Region, NMFS, determined that
Amendment 1 is necessary for the conservation and management of the
Atlantic salmon fishery and that it is consistent with the Magnuson-
Stevens Act and other applicable laws.
This final rule has been determined to be not significant for
purposes of E.O. 12866.
The Chief Counsel for Regulation of the Department of Commerce has
certified to the Chief Counsel for Advocacy of the Small Business
Administration that this rule would not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities. No comments were
received regarding this certification. As a result, a regulatory
flexibility analysis was not prepared.
List of Subjects in 50 CFR Part 648
Fisheries, Fishing, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
Dated: July 21, 1999.
Andrew A. Rosenberg,
Deputy Assistant Administrator for Fisheries, National Marine Fisheries
Service.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, 50 CFR part 648 is amended
as follows:
PART 648--FISHERIES OF THE NORTHEASTERN UNITED STATES
1. The authority citation for part 648 continues to read as
follows:
Authority: 16 U.S.C. 1801 et seq.
2. Section 648.41 is added to read as follows:
Sec. 648.41 Framework specifications.
(a) Within season management action. The New England Fishery
Management Council (NEFMC) may, at any time, initiate action to
implement, add to or adjust Atlantic salmon management measures to
allow for Atlantic salmon aquaculture projects in the EEZ, provided
such an action is consistent with the goals and objectives of the
Atlantic Salmon FMP.
(b) Framework process. After initiation of an action to implement,
add to or adjust an Atlantic salmon management measure to allow for an
Atlantic salmon aquaculture project in the EEZ, the NEFMC shall develop
and analyze Atlantic salmon management measures to allow for Atlantic
salmon aquaculture projects in the EEZ over the span of at least two
NEFMC meetings. The NEFMC shall provide the public with advance notice
of the availability of both the proposals and the analysis and
opportunity to comment on them prior to and at the second NEFMC
meeting. The NEFMC's recommendation on aquaculture management measures
must come from one or more of the following categories: minimum fish
sizes, gear restrictions, minimum mesh sizes, possession limits,
tagging requirements, monitoring requirements, reporting requirements,
permit restrictions, area closures, establishment of special management
areas or zones and any other management measures currently included in
the FMP.
(c) NEFMC recommendation. After developing Atlantic salmon
management measures and receiving public testimony, the NEFMC shall
make a recommendation to NMFS. The NEFMC's recommendation must include
supporting rationale and, if management measures are recommended, an
analysis
of impacts and a recommendation to NMFS on whether to issue the
management
measures as a final rule. If NMFS concurs with the NEFMC's
recommendation to issue
the management measures as a final rule, the NEFMC must consider at
least the following factors and provide support and analysis for each
factor considered:
(1) Whether the availability of data on which the recommended
management measures are based allows for adequate time to publish a
proposed rule, and whether regulations have to be in place for an
entire harvest/fishing season.
(2) Whether there has been adequate notice and opportunity for
participation by the public and members of the affected industry in the
development of the NEFMC's recommended management measures.
(3) Whether there is an immediate need to protect the resource.
(4) Whether there will be a continuing evaluation of measures
adopted following their implementation as a final rule.
(d) NMFS action. If the NEFMC's recommendation includes
implementation of management measures and, after reviewing the NEFMC's
recommendation and supporting information:
(1) NMFS concurs with the NEFMC's recommended management measures
and determines that the recommended measures should be issued as a
final rule based on the factors specified in paragraph (c)(1) through
(4) of this section, the measures will be issued as a final rule in the
Federal Register.
(2) NMFS concurs with the NEFMC's recommendation and determines
that the recommended management measures should be published first as a
proposed rule, the measures will be published as a proposed rule in the
Federal Register. After additional public comment, if NMFS concurs with
the NEFMC recommendation, the measures will be issued as a final rule
in the Federal Register.
(3) NMFS does not concur, the NEFMC will be notified in writing of
the reasons for the non-concurrence.
(e) Emergency action. Nothing in this section is meant to derogate
from the authority of the Secretary to take emergency action under
section 305(e) of the Magnuson-Stevens Act.
[FR Doc. 99-19172 Filed 7-26-99; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3510-22-F
(28) [MULTILINGUAL INFO CLEARINGHOUSE]
-- Back to the Table of Contents --
Subject: Agency opposes proposed Maine salmon farms
Date: Thu, 29 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
E-Mail:
Web site: www.seaweb.org/sac
*Ocean Awareness Campaign* and
*SeaWeb Salmon Aquaculture Clearinghouse*
102 Waterman Street, Suite 16
Providence, Rhode Island 02906
Subject: Agency report opposes proposed salmon farms in Maine
Date: Fri, 30 Jul 1999
From: Bill Mott
Copyright 1999 Bangor Daily News
BANGOR DAILY NEWS (BANGOR, MAINE)
July 29, 1999 Thursday
LENGTH: 1171 words
HEADLINE: Report opposes Blue Hill salmon farm
DMR staff says aquaculture project may adversely affect bay
BYLINE: Samantha Coit Of the NEWS Staff
BODY:
A staff report by the state Department of Marine Resources
opposes a company's plan to tuck two fish farms raising 1.4 million
Atlantic salmon into protected sections of Blue Hill Bay.
Atlantic Salmon of Maine, a 10-year-old fish farming company,
wants the exclusive right to raiseAtlantic salmon and blue mussels
off two islands in the bay -- a move that prompted opposition on
Mount Desert Island and a $ 50,000 opposition campaign by some Blue
Hill area residents.
The company applied for 10-year leases on two sites to raise
seafood in a 15-acre tract off the northern end of Bartlett Island
and a 26.67-acre section off Long Island, just south of Deep Cove.
After reviewing evidence from public hearings on the
applications, department staff this week recommended that Marine
Resources Commissioner George Lapointe reject the plans. Lapointe
has the final say.
The company plans to challenge the staff recommendation, said
Tom Royal, president of the Belfast-based company, on Wednesday.
Royal said he was disappointed and confused by the
recommendation.
"What is the signal it sends about aquaculture in the state of
Maine? " he said. "It's not unique in any way," he said of Blue Hill
Bay's suitability for salmon pens.
"Obviously, we will vigorously point out what we think were the
inaccuracies or changes in precedents and see what the commissioner
says," Royal said.
The company's plan to set up pens in Blue Hill Bay is an effort
to improve husbandry practices rather than to increase the amount
of fish the company produces, Royal said.
Atlantic Salmon of Maine already operates two hatcheries and
six sea farm leases, including four in Machias and two in Pleasant
Bay 40 miles west of Machias, and one processing plant in
Machiasport in Washington County.
What happens next?
In the next 10 days, Atlantic Salmon of Maine and others who
had requested legal standing in the case may respond in writing to
the department staff's recommendations to deny the applications.
Lapointe will review the department's recommendation and
comment from parties in the case, then adopt or change the staff
decision. Lapointe could reach an entirely different conclusion,
said Tom Harnett, assistant attorney general with the state
Attorney General's Office.
Anyone dissatisfied with the department's final action on the
applications may challenge the decision in Superior Court. The
company and parties involved in the case have 30 days to file an
appeal from the date the department issuesits final decision.
Those who do not have legal standing in the case may file an appeal
within 40 days of the commissioner's decision, Harnett said.
"In a perfect world final agency action [on the applications]
would occur sometime around August 15," he said.
Other than Atlantic Salmon of Maine, four parties involved in
the Bartlett Island lease application have been granted legal
standing in the case: Charles Gagnebin III, who owns property
overlooking the site; Doug Chapman, an attorney representing
Bartlett Island property owner David Rockefeller; Ralph Keef,
president of the Maine Council of the Atlantic Salmon Federation;
and Barbara Witham of the Union River Salmon Association.
No parties requested legal standing in the lease application
for the site off the coast of Long Island in Blue Hill.
If the final DMR decision favors the lease sites, the Army
Corps of Engineers, which issues permits for proposed structures on
the sites, will determine whether to grant a permit a month after
the DMR issues its recommendation.
Bartlett Island site
Potential navigational problems and overburdening of local
facilities topped the list of why-nots in the staff recommendation
to deny Atlantic Salmon of Maine's application to lease a 15-acre
tract off Bartlett Island. The company proposes to raise 512,000
salmon there.
The proposed lease site would unreasonably interfere with
navigation and uses of the area, including the town's public
landing and a popular swimming spot in Galley Cove, near the area
of the proposed lease, according to the DMR staff report.
On shore, the company's limited use of a nearby public landing
in Mount Desert would overburden the town's ability to sustain
public enjoyment of the landing, DMR staff concluded.
The town's landing, located about one mile south of the
proposed site, is at capacity for parking space and mooring
permits, and its uses interfere with nearby property owners.
On the bay, the proposed lease site would be about 500 feet
from Galley Cove, identified in April public hearings as a swimming
spot distinctive for its uncommonly high water temperatures during
summer and its protected areas.
Concern for the safety and welfare of children swimming in a
cove 500 feet from a commercialoperation with its associated
traffic and activities is also cited in the report.
"I think we're all very pleased," said Gagnebin, who owns
property in Mount Desert overlooking the proposed lease site. "I
think it's a sustainable decision," he said Wednesday.
Long Island site
Data indicating that the proposed 26.67-acre Long Island lease
site would hurt the environment served as the primary reason for
the department's recommendation against the application.
Atlantic Salmon of Maine's plan to raise 896,000 Atlantic
salmon off the western side of Long Island would affect the amount
of dissolved oxygen in the water, and would not meet state
standards that require a minimum amount of dissolved oxygen in
waters surrounding the site to ensure a healthy ecosystem.
A lack of dissolved oxygen would interfere with the ability of
the lease site and surrounding areas to support existing,
ecologically significant plants and animals, the department
recommendation maintains.
"Delighted," was the word Friends of Blue Hill Bay steering
committee member Ellen Best used to describe her reaction to the
department's recommendation. "We're hoping that's going to be
the final decision," she said.
Representatives of Atlantic Salmon of Maine and Friends of Blue
Hill Bay met Monday to talk about the proposed salmon farm and
"didn't find much common ground," Best said.
Friends of Blue Hill Bay has bitterly opposed the plan to bring salmon
farms
to local waters. The group hopes the commissioner will
reject the application, but is prepared to take legal action to
keep the pens out, she said.
The ad hoc group has raised $ 50,000 in recent months for an
independent environmental study, now under way, and attorney fees.
The issue is significant in Maine, where the DMR has granted 92
aquaculture leases. They vary in type, size and length of lease
permit, said Laurice Churchill, DMR's aquaculture lease
administrator.
The department is reviewing 29 aquaculture leases, including a
10-year lease site application from Acadia Aquaculture Inc. for a
35-acre tract near Dunham's Cove off Long Island in Blue Hill Bay.
GRAPHIC: David Coffin of Bucks Harbor, an employee of Atlantic Salmon of
Maine, feeds fish recently in a pen on the company's farm in Machias Bay. The
company has proposed two similar aquaculture operations in Hancock County, but a
state agency staff report this week recommended against the applications. (NEWS
Photo by Bob DeLong) Workers at Atlantic Salmon of Maine in Machiasport trim and
prepare salmon fillets for shipment. The plant processes fish raised in
Machias Bay. Tom Royal, the company'spresident, says plans to set up pens in Blue
Hill Bay in Hancock County are part of an effort to improve husbandry practices
rather than to increase the volume of fish the company produces. (NEWS
Photo byBob DeLong) NEWS Map by Eric Zelz
|
