"I think it is important the industry spends some time taking a look at itself and its own role in the world we live in. There’s an awful lot we have to improve if we are to operate in a sustainable manner in the future."
- Salmon has a serious image problem’. Interview with Pan Fish CEO Atle Eide. Intrafish 29 January 2007.
"Our [seafood] production methods are in danger of becoming out of sync with how our major customers define good business practices."
- Ocean Beauty Seafood CEO, Mark Palmer, speaking to delegation of Alaska lawmakers. Intrafish 7 February 2007.
"If we’ve lost our appetite for wild salmon, you can’t help thinking, then there isn’t much else to lose."
- Roisin Ingle. Sunday Times Magazine. 5 June 2005.
SPIN:
"Disinformation is defined as a deliberate effort to mislead. It manipulates the conditions of a social perceptive consciousness and thwarts cohesiveness among people. It is symptomatic of ownership concentrated in a few hands and pervasive across societies.
It pervades the salmon-farming industry, which is dominated by large transnational corporations whose tentacles have spread from Europe to the Americas and Oceania. . . . Spin-doctoring techniques used in salmon-farming [are]: factual inaccuracies, assertions, marginalisation, tu quoque, [and] ad hominem. . . .
Assertions are statements not based on logical premises or fact. Assertions are replete; for instance, some salmon-farming advocates insist there is 'no going back' as if the salmon farms have become 'facts-in-the-sea' which is a patently false declaration.
Tu quoque is an attempt at justification by noting that the matter-at-hand exists elsewhere.
Ad hominem is the tactic of ignoring the message and attacking the messenger. The [salmon farming] industry launched an assault against environmentalists, describing them as rich and foreign. One might be tempted to note, tu quoque, the presence of large Norwegian salmon-farming corporations in British Columbia."
- Kim Petersen. Guest column, The Salmon Farm Monitor. August 2004.
COASTAL ZONE MANAGEMENT or "What is the overall plan for Lough Swilly?"
"Coastal management in Ireland is characterized by a sectoral approach to resource exploitation and management. . . . Unless decision makers facilitate the development and implementation of an integrated management strategy for the coastal area, by adopting a broad perspective and a multisectoral approach, the policies, which will prevail, will continue to be driven by sectoral interests placing sustainable development of the coast beyond the reach of current and future generations."
- Review of Integrated Coastal Zone Management & Principles of Best Practice. Prepared for The Heritage Council by the Coastal and Marine Resources Centre, University College Cork. 2004.
"It has been [eight] years since the draft policy for coastal zone management in Ireland was produced by Brady, Shipman, Martin (1997). Since then, there has been a lack of consultation on the issue."
- Ibid
"There appears to be a lack of motivation towards developing an ICZM policy for Ireland . . . . Ireland has yet to take the initial step in the coastal programme cycle (identification of issues) at a national level. Development of a national ICZM policy or supporting legislation does not appear to be a priority. Instead, Ireland prefers to wait for directions from Europe which hold the weight of legal force (e.g. Birds Directive, Habitats Directive, Water Framework Directive). This reflects a short-sighted view for a country with such valuable coastal and marine resources."
- Ibid
Tommy Broughan, TD:
". . . Can we take it the coastal zone management Bill has finally been abandoned. The Taoiseach announced perhaps 20 times in recent years that it would be coming and that it was listed on various programmes. What is the plan for that Bill?” The Taoiseach: “. . . With regard to the coastal zone management Bill, it is being incorporated into the marine services Bill, which will provide for comprehensive new legislative proposals for the seafood sector and the marine coastal zone."
- Dail, 28 April 2004.
"It is disappointing that the House is waiting seven years for the coastal zone management Bill. I raised this issue with the Taoiseach, the Minister for Defence and others on the Order of Business a number of times in recent weeks. I thought we would have a wide-ranging protective measure and regime for our coastal zone areas. However, we appear to be abandoning this broad vision of protecting our seas by introducing a very limited foreshore Bill. I may be wrong so perhaps the Minister of State will brief us on it. It is deplorable that the Government has not supported initiatives around the coast such as the Bantry Bay charter, work on Lough Swilly and so on, where projects got up and running, valuable research work and co-ordination of activities was carried out and the projects were then allowed to effectively fail."
- Tommy Broughan TD, in the Dail. 3 June 2004.
"A report on the [coastal zone management] action has to be submitted to the European Commission by February 2006. My Department has indicated its intention to publish during 2004 legislative proposals for the consolidation and modernization of the law on foreshore administration and to support the development and operation of more integrated approaches to the management of coastal areas and their resources."
- Minister of Communications, Marine & Natural Resources, Dermot Ahern TD, in the Dail, 29 June 2004
Trevor Sargent TD
"Legislation has been promised for a number of years on coastal zone management. That now appears to have fallen off the continental shelf. Likewise, the foreshore Bill seems to have fallen by the wayside. There was no indication of a date for this Bill previous and there is now no indication that there will be such a Bill. Likewise, there is no harbours Bill, no marine services Bill, no maritime safety No.2 Bill, and no maritime safety agency Bill. Has the Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources been cut back to such an extent that these Bills are no longer under consideration or where will they appear?"
The Tanaiste: "The coastal zone management Bill will be incorporated in a marine services Bill but I do not have a date for the Bill."
- Dail, 1 February 2005.
"In terms of the annual value of the net benefits generated by ICZM initiatives, the modeling suggest that these were €127.1 million for low level initiatives (a benefit : cost ratio of 13.6 : 1); and €659.8 million for high level ICZM initiatives (8.6 : 1)."
- An Assessment of Socio Economic Costs & Benefits of Integrated Coastal Zone Management. Final Report to the European Commission. Firn Crichton Roberts Ltd & Graduate School of Environmental Studies, University of Strathclyde. November 2000.
"Beneficial though EIA [Environmental Impact Assessment] is, however, it has a shortcoming in that it is only able to examine the potential impacts of a single project or development in isolation. Individual project EIAs will not in themselves be able to quantify the long-term, cumulative, interactive and synergistic effects resulting from the location of a number of aquaculture developments in a particular sea loch or body of coastal water. What is required is a strategic environmental assessment (SEA).
"By undertaking a comprehensive audit of the physical and environmental characteristics of discrete marine areas . . . assessing the current level of aquaculture activity to which they are exposed, and the nature and level of other uses and resources, it should be possible to calculate the carrying capacity for aquaculture within a particular marine area."
- Chris Berry and Alistair Davison. Bitter Harvest: A call for reform in Scottish aquaculture. (Naylor et al, 1998). WWF-UK. November 2001.
"Self-monitoring could be considered inconsistent with satisfactory environmental regulation of the aquaculture industry, not least because even with an [environmental] auditing system in place, data quality may vary."
- Berry and Davison, op cit.
"The two key issues to emerge from the [ICZM] study [were] a lack of public awareness of coastal issues and political apathy towards coastal management."
- Coastal Communities Network - CoCoNet - INTERREG IIIA Final Report [on Integrated Coastal Zone Management]. Coastal & Marine Resources Centre, University College Cork and Marine & Coastal Environment Group, Cardiff University. September 2004.
THE ECOLOGICAL FOOTPRINT OF A SALMON FARM:
"The industry says they are improving their techniques all the time, but they cannot continue their experiments in public waters."
- Anne Mosness, (USA) Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy. Seattle Post-Intelligencer. Intrafish 8 November 2006.
"It takes two to four kilograms of fish like mackerel or anchovies from Chile or Peru, for example, to produce one kilogram of farmed salmon for the tables and barbecues of the industrialized world. We rarely pause to think about the true implications of this. Where is the discussion over who actually have the right to and need that protein more? The fish used to produce fish meal and fish oil are not being consumed by those who need them most. Local food-fish are slowly becoming too expensive for the people of Chile or Peru. Their natural protein sources are being depleted in order for us to have salmon on our tables. This gross social inequity is rarely, if ever, a consideration. . . . The more farmed salmon we eat, the bigger the salmon farming industry becomes, the more feed is required, and the more our oceans are depleted of other fish. But this is rarely, if ever, discussed. When did we become so disconnected from the realities of the food we eat?"
- David Suzuki, Guest Columnist. The Salmon Farm Monitor. May 2005. www.salmonfarmmonitor.org/guest/shtml/
"Aquaculture has tended to 'farm up the food chain' by using industrial fishing products (aquafeeds) to increase production. This intensification of aquaculture increases risks of local pollution and disease transmission, and removes marine food resources that may be important for larger fish, marine mammals and seabirds. . . Aquaculture poses a number of ecological problems. . . Technological improvements and national/international regulation promise some amelioration, but many aspects of aquaculture as currently practised are ecologically unsustainable."
- John Davenport [Professor of Zoology, University College Cork] et al. Aquaculture: the ecological issues. British Ecological Society. Blackwell. 2003.
"It has been calculated that to keep up with the demand for fish meal and oil by the European salmon farming sector, the industry will need a 'marine support area' of between 40,000 and 50,000 times the surface area of cultivation. This is equivalent to around 90 per cent of the primary production area of the North Sea."
- Chris Berry and Alistair Davison. Bitter Harvest: A call for reform in Scottish aquaculture. (Naylor et al, 1998). WWF-UK. November 2001.
"The farmed salmon industry [is] a rapacious consumer of wild fish and other energy sources:
- Professor William Rees [School of Regional and Economic Planning, University of British Columbia]. World Summit on Salmon, June 2003. Vancouver, BC. Intrafish, 16 June 03.
"Requiring as it does the ecosystem support of around 1 sq km of marine and 3 hectares of terrestrial support to produce one tonne of farmed salmon, the industry concentrates the product of very large areas into around one square kilometer of feedlot cage area . . . "
- Alan Berry. Fish Farming Today (Letters). October 2000.
"For every kilogram of farmed fish on supermarket shelves it takes between 2 to 4kg of captured wild fish to feed it."
- Joint Marine Programme [partnership of World Wildlife Fund, Scottish Wildlife Trust and Royal Society for the Protection of Birds]. Intrafish. 24 September 2002.
"Using guidelines laid down by OSPAR - the international organisation responsible for combating marine pollution in the north-east Atlantic - it has been estimated that in 2000, Scottish salmon farms produced 7,5000 tonnes of nitrogen, comparable to the annual sewage inputs of 3.2 million people, and 1,240 tonnes of phosphorous, comparable to that from 9.4 million people."
- Berry and Davison, op cit.
". . . Researchers looked at 5,514 juvenile pink and chum salmon as they swam up two narrow fjords in British Columbia, past a salmon farm. The study found that as the fish migrated past the farm – about one-eighth of a mile long – clouds of lice infected the juvenile wild salmon at unnaturally high rates for nearly 19 miles around the farm. Normally, sea lice are rarely found on wild juvenile salmon. ‘Conservatively, this means that the parasite footprint of the farm is 150 times larger than the farm itself,’ said [John] Volpe, a University of Victoria marine ecologist."
- Study: Salmon From Farms Breed Sea Lice, AP Press Release. 30 March 2005.
"Sea lice can lower the fitness of salmon – and in some cases be lethal – as they create open lesions on the surface of the fish that compromises its ability to maintain its salt-water balance. When infection rates are high enough, the parasites feed on the fish at rates greater than the fish can feed itself, literally eating the fish alive. Young salmon are much more vulnerable due to their small size. . . . Previous studies on the transfer of sea lice to wild salmon from farms have been dismissed by some in the industry. But experts say the precision of the data sampling and mathematical modeling in the latest study mean it will be hard to ignore."
- Farm sea lice plague wild salmon, BBC News. 29 March 2005.
"Commercial fishermen have been excluded from traditional fishing grounds [in Lough Swilly] by the monopolistic hold aquaculturists exercise over the more than 1,000 acres they already occupy. This may be a small proportion of the lough's area, but the ecological footprint of salmon farms is estimated at 1 square kilometre for every tonne of fish produced. After recent licence awards, Lough Swilly's salmon farms are entitled to produce 1,500 tonnes a year, affecting 1,500 sq kms of water. Considering that this is equivalent to an area 30 miles by 18 miles, it is safe to conclude that the whole of Lough Swilly is now affected by salmon farming. At the very least, the overall impact of aquaculture on wild salmon and sea trout, migratory birds, wildfowl and shore-bird habitats, water quality, navigation and the general appearance of the lough, extends well beyond the precise boundaries of the aquaculture industry's physical operations."
- John Mulcahy, spokesman for Save The Swilly. 'Aquaculture consultation - the emperors have no clothes'. 2001.
"It is true that the original application was for a site which was smaller in area than that which was recommended in the VIA for which the decision was made. This was to allow for a better alignment of cages to minimise the visual impact. . . It also allows for all associated apparatus and moored craft, including feed barges, service boat and their moorings, to be accommodated within a licensed area. In effect the cages as proposed will only cover about 10% of the total area licensed."
- Marine Harvest explanation as to how Dooanmore site, applied for as 20 hectares, resulted in a licence for 36.6 hectares. June 2003.
"Are cages tidily arranged? NO - Elongated layout over area of 1400m x 600m (84 Ha) compared to 17 Ha area licenced. Due to expansion outside licensed area, visual impact is higher than it ought to be."
"Farm position compliance: As was the case in last audit, all cages are outside the licensed area. While I appreciate the considerable difficulties facing the Anny Point operation in trying to expand without another sister site for fallowing, the situation remains as it has for many years that there is no correlation between cages on the water and the site actually licensed. It is hardly satisfactory from anyone's point of view that this situation persists."
"Are navigation buoys installed as specified? NO Not in licensed area"
"Boats used: Swilly 1 Multicat, Swilly 2, Swilly 4, and 2 Polar Circle Workboats"
"Production Records . . There has therefore been a technical breach (at least) of the single site production limit at Anny Point site."
"Environmental impact issues . . . Noise impact: On the day of the inspection, noise from radios/loudspeakers on workboats at the cages was clearly audible from the nearby tourist road. The noise from a feed blower and a Consaw then in use seemed excessive also. While conditions on the day were conducive to noise travelling more easily onshore, I would have to question the high volume use of FM radio and the effectiveness of silencers on some of the equipment in use - both these aspects of site practice might be looked at as they could be perceived as being insensitive environmentally."
- Department of Marine Engineers' Annual Inspection Report of Lough Swilly salmon farm site at Anny Point, August 2003.
"[A]ll the compounds used to control sea lice were first developed for terrestrial agriculture and all of the compounds are labeled by regulatory agencies as toxic or extremely toxic to aquatic invertebrates and/or fish. Five of the compounds (ivermectin, emamectin, doramectin, teflubenzuron and diflubenzuron) are mixed with feed and the remaining compounds are applied in bath treatments. . . Pesticides mixed with feed tend to fall uneaten to the bottom and accumulate in sediments. Pesticides can also pass through a fish largely unabsorbed. Unlike antibiotics, pesticides used in bath treatments release significant quantities of toxic material directly into surrounding waters (GESAMP 1997). . . . Very little scientific, field-generated data exists on the long-term sequential use of pesticides in salmon aquaculture on non-target species and their subsequent population- or community-level impacts. . . . [There is] also a lack of toxicology data on the so-called 'inert' ingredients which typically comprise a significant percentage (by volume) of a given pesticide. Inert compounds act as solvents or carriers. . . [and] can be toxic. . . . In some instances, they can be of greater environmental concern than the active compound itself."
- Burridge L.E. and Haya, K. A review of di-n-butylphthalate in the aquatic environment; concerns regarding its use in salmonid aquaculture. Journal of the World Aquaculture Society, vol. 26 (1). 1995.
THE FOOTPRINT OF A HARVESTING SITE:
"Harvesting takes place at up to 50 tonnes per day. However, whilst some fish may be harvested immediately following arrival at the harvest site, it may be necessary to hold some fish there for somewhat longer, subject to packing, sales and market requirements. In these circumstances, some of the stock may need to be maintained on feed at the harvest site . . . However it has been calculated that the growth at the harvest site (biogain) will not exceed 100 tonnes per annum (or actually during the seven-month harvest period, including the winter months when growth will be relatively slow).
The harvested fish will be transferred from the harvest pontoon via a diesel generator-powered Silkstream type vacuum pump, through a floating / semi-submerged pipeline, to the handling facility onshore. It is proposed to bury the pipeline, across the short expanse of stone beach, from the low water mark to hard standing on the handling site. . . .
Each land-based handling site will be equipped with a concrete slab, equipped with CO2 stunning, manual gill cutting and bleeding tank facilities mounted on it. A second Silkstream type pump, either mains or D/G operated, will be used to pump the fish, once slaughtered, with their iced blood water, direct from the bleeding tank into food grade road tankers in which the fish will be transported direct to the Rinmore processing plan. Nett tanker payload is a nominal 15 tonnes of fish. . . .
The harvesting operations will result in year-round local traffic load to and from the new sites. This will comprise one to three trucks carrying ice inwards and one to three trucks carrying fish outwards on between 30 and 100 days during each nominal 200-day harvest period. . . . [using] food grade tankers for bulk movement of fish for processing. . . .
Outside the harvest periods, the pontoon and accessories will be towed away from the harvest sites, for moored storage elsewhere. . . .
The company intends to apply for full (i.e. not trial) licence in each case. . . . Prompt responses would be appreciated since it is Marine Harvest's intent to carry out any required fieldwork during the present summer period."
- Marine Harvest submission to Aquaculture Licensing Advisory Committee for harvest sites in Mulroy Bay and in Lough Swilly, June 2003.
YOU CAN'T EAT THE SCENERY?
"The Foot and Mouth experience represents a timely reminder to us all that National Parks are more than scenic views and postcard pictures, they are crucial to the economy of surrounding communities. Strategies to preserve our natural heritage can be entirely complimentary to, rather than in any way being in conflict with, the legitimate concerns of local communities to maximise the economic and social development and advancement of those communities."
- Martin Cullen, Minister for the Environment, Heritage and Local Government, announcing first-ever management plan process for the country's six National Parks. Donegal Democrat. 23 September 2004.
"Failte Ireland is to flex its muscles and use its powers in the planning process to protect Ireland’s green image. . . . Under the planning laws Failte Ireland is already a prescribed body which allows it have [sic] an input into development, but this power has not been exercised to date. ‘Tourism Inc has not been active enough in this area,’ Failte Ireland chief executive Shaun Quinn said yesterday.”
“Tourism body steps up battle to protect Ireland’s ‘green’ image; 90pc of visitors say our physical environment is a major attraction"
- Irish Independent, 22 November 2005.
"Donegal has some of the most scenic coastline in Europe and it is important that we protect and manage this natural resource for the benefit of the local communities. Protecting the coastline is vitally important for leisure activities in the area and also for the tourism industry."
- Pat the Cope Gallagher TD, Minister for Marine. Marine Times Newspaper, January 2006.
FUNDING and GRANTS:
"[Aquaculture] development has been driven primarily by the desires of industry while wider environmental and socio-economic issues have not been addressed. Aquaculture can no longer be considered as new, young, small-scale or environmentally insignificant." Berry and Davison, op cit.
"Europe criticizes America, but its policy on sustainable development is lots of greedy snouts in the subsidy trough. It’s a scam."
- James Lovelock, creator of the Gaia theory, interview in The Sunday Times, 5 February 2006.
JOBS:
"The merging of Nutreco and Stolt Sea Farm isn't an assertive strategy. It's about two companies that want to pull out of aquaculture, that are merging."
- Group CEO Atle Eide of Pan Fish. Intrafish. 23 November 2004.
"Salmon farming . . . relies on increasingly large, intensive production facilities . . . An increasing majority of the industry appears to be controlled by foreign-owned multinational companies. While these companies provide much-needed employment in many coastal rural areas, the locally-created jobs tend to be relatively low-skilled and low-paid. The bulk of the profit from the farms tends to be exported. . . [Employment numbers in Scotland] have fallen since the mid-1990s, even though production continues to increase. . . . Profits generated by the multinational companies dominating the sector are unlikely to stay in the local area."
- Berry and Davison, op cit.
"Multinationals have management structures which often result in strategic and management decisions being taken at levels remote from local operations, potentially making consideration of environmental and social issues difficult and of low priority . . . Multinational companies have operations centred at other global locations. . . the reality is that they operate within a global commercial structure and are responsive to international economic and market conditions."
- Berry and Davison, op cit.
"With increased intensification of the industry the production of salmon may have rocketed, but the benefits for local communities remain the same. Full and part time employment on salmon farms has dropped slightly from 1995 to 1999, yet salmon production increased by a massive 76% during the same period."
- Scottish Executive, Environment and Rural Affairs Department report. 2000.
CHEMICALS:
"The use of chemicals to treat sea lice is also an issue, as the vast majority have [sic] been developed for use in terrestrial agriculture and are internationally classified as being toxic or extremely toxic to aquatic organisms. . . . There is only a relatively small body of research and data on the lethal and sub-lethal effects of such treatments on non-target marine organisms . . . there is a lack of toxicity data relating to 'inert' ingredients such as solvents or carriers that may be used . . . such 'inert' chemicals may be toxic or possess endocrine (hormone) disrupting properties, and in some instances may be of greater environmental concern than a treatment's 'active' ingredient."
- SEERAD (Milewski, 2003), op cit.
"Chemical usage by Marine Harvest Ireland at Anny Point salmon-farm in Lough Swilly:
January - December 2000:
Slice [emamectin benzoate - bath treatment] 456g.
Cypermethrin [Betamax - in-feed treatment] 1610 g.
Ivermectin [In-feed; not approved for use in Ireland] 275.7g
January - December 2003:
Slice - 1.391 kg
Cypermethrin (Excis) - 195 g
January - November 2004:
Slice - 1.518 kg
Cypermethrin - 295 g"
- Statistics supplied by Department of Communications, Marine and Natural Resources.
"Unauthorised treatments have been detected at four [salmon] farms between 1999 and 2002. . . Ivermectin is an example of an unauthorised treatment. It was detected once in 1999 and once in 2000, being used as a sea lice treatment, but it is not authorised for use in aquaculture."
- Marine Institute Briefing Paper on Aquaculture Monitoring for the Oireachtas Committee Hearing on Aquaculture, 5 November 2003.
"Those caught using illegal chemicals can in no way be allowed to call themselves a quality product."
- Chief Executive of Friends of the Earth Scotland, Kevin Dunion. Intrafish. 30 January 2001.
". . . Emamectin benzoate, an ingredient in Slice, is highly toxic . . . 'one of a class of drugs known to block a major inhibitory neural transmitter in the brain. We should not have to consume these chemicals in our salmon.' Animal studies have demonstrated exposure to the chemical during development causes changes in behaviour and growth as well as pathological changes in the brain."
- Dr David Carpenter, Director of Institute for Health and Environment, University of Albany, NY. Intrafish. 10 December 2004.
"[Slice] hasn't been approved for use in Canada or the US. Both countries have given permission to use it [to control sea lice on salmon farms] but only through an emergency release, which requires an application."
- BC Salmon Farmers Association spokesman. Intrafish. 13 December 2004.
"All wastes, contaminants and pollutants eventually end up in the sea from which it is impossible for man to remove them. Yet, the most important source of wild food eaten by people and farmed animals is marine biodiversity, notably fish, and these fish are directly exposed to these contaminants. A priority of pollution control must thus be to prevent the release of persistent contaminants into the environment and their entry into man's food chain."
- Mark J. Costello - A Framework for an Action Plan on Marine Biodiversity in Ireland. Prepared for the Marine Institute. November 2000.
PRODUCTION MONITORING & FEED QUOTAS:
"[WWF recommends] the introduction of a 'single year feed quota' to farms that places a maximum limitation on the feed usage at a particular farm in any given year. This would go some way to addressing nutrient pollution concerns and would promote responsible and efficient husbandry and farm management."
- Dunion, op cit.
ENVIRONMENTAL STANDARDS, FOOD SAFETY, etc:
"Traceability cannot increase any safety or intrinsic quality aspect of fish and fishery products."
- Hector Lupin, FAO Fisheries Industry Division, at a conference in Bremen. Intrafish. 12 February 2004.
"ISO 14001, the international standard for environmental management systems . . . has been criticised by a number of environmental management professionals who say it is 'not particularly meaningful' and that it 'says nothing about the environmental performance of a firm (ENDS, 1998). Indeed, in their detailed analysis of the ISO 14001 standard, Krut & Gleckman (1998) go so far as to conclude that 'on its own, ISO 14001 cannot achieve sustainable industrial development or even environmental performance improvement' and that 'ISO 14001 may become, like many ISO standards, a market instrument - in this case with no connection to its original environmental moorings.'"
- Berry and Davison, op cit.
"One of the things that I worry about as a commercial fisherman, as a First Nation’s fisherman [Canadian Northwest Coast Indian], is that those [wild Pacific] salmon are going past this farmed fish. They say that it’s not going to harm anything but what if it does? I want all people to know who are eating farmed fish, Atlantic salmon, that my people aren’t eating it. They’re not eating it because we feel that it’s not healthy. If it were, we would eat it."
- Chris Cook, First Nations commercial fisherman and President of the Native Brotherhood of British Columbia in Alert Bay, April 2004. www.pbs.org/emptyoceans/fts/salmon/viewpoints.html
"PCBs [and dioxins] occurred at higher concentrations in European farm-raised salmon than in farmed salmon North and South America. . . . Here we present information on cancer and noncancer health risks of exposure to dioxins in farmed and wild salmon. . . . Consumption of farmed salmon at relatively low frequencies results in elevated exposure to dioxins and dioxin-like compounds with commensurate elevation in estimates of health risk.”"
- Foran, Jeffrey A. et al – Risk-Based Consumption Advice for Farmed Atlantic and Wild Pacific Salmon Contaminated with Dioxins and Dioxin-like Compounds. Environmental Health Perspectives, Vol. 113, No. 5, May 2005.
"In the most comprehensive analysis of farmed and wild salmon to date, researchers analyzed toxic contaminants in approximately 700 farmed and wild salmon (totaling 2 metric tons) . . . [The study concluded] consumption of more than one meal of farmed salmon per month could pose unacceptable cancer risks according to U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) methods for calculating fish consumption advisories.”"
- Institute for Health and the Environment, University of Albany, New York. Press release ‘First Global Sampling Study Reveals Health Risks Associated with Consuming Farm Raised Salmon’, commenting on above study, 3 May 2005.
BIODIVERSITY
"Marine biodiversity is of growing importance in Ireland: directly for angling, nature watching, scuba diving and photography; and indirectly by providing a pleasurable and clean environment for activities such as water sports and boating."
- Costello, op cit.
TRAWBREAGA BAY - Why no EIS?
"The [EU] Habitats Directive required all States to have legislation in place to apply the Directive in 1994, and to have a review of their habitats and species completed by June 1995. . . By June 2004 all [EU] Member States must designate and complete management plans for their SAC. However, areas qualifying and proposed as SAC are regarded as legally protected even before full formal designation, and any developments in SAC require an environmental impact assessment (EIA). "
- Costello, op cit.