This is an article I wrote and was asked to post!
Subject: There is a "Wolf" in "your" "Henhouse"!

The more I research and study Marine Harvest Norway (MHN) - parent to Marine Harvest Canada (MHC), the further ”I” do not like their callous business practices, ethics, or philosophies! I believe they are not concerned of any damage “they” are doing to the environment or wish to sustain any “wild” species; rather, just market share, cost of production and bottom line are the driving forces that will gain the world dominance in aquaculture they desire. This company will actually profit from the collapse of BC wild salmon, which competes directly with their “aquaculture” industry. Talk about a “wolf in the henhouse”! That has pretty much been confirmed from “senior executives” and “board of directors” comments made throughout the years in financial statements and with their insistence not provide the requested information regarding the Fraser River Sockeye collapse.. I also considerate it reiterated and confirmed with the lackadaisical comments regarding the damage in Kyuquot. I certainly hope Canada holds them financially responsible and a proper “clean up” made mandatory. I also believe that to be “gross negligence” which severe penalties should be imposed. Yes, those contaminates can be removed!

It appears MHN and MHC is providing Canada, DFO, and the World with “very” selective information –minimizing “bad publicity”, “limiting exposures”, while trying to convince the world – “they care”! They are providing only minimum information required by law, while camouflaging all the detrimental information they can. Their objective to remain indiscernible from their surrounding environment is not going to continue to work. There are now too many asking many questions. I personally “specifically” asked for “sea lice count” and “SLICE” usage for the “individual sites” in Campbell River, 2007. What do I get, the following:

Please note that does say, “Use of In-Feed Sea Lice Therapeutants in British Columbia (1996-2008)”and “MH Canada (Broughton Archipelago) all farms sea lice management, 2004-2008” and this is the message that accompanied them:

“I understand your time may be limited to what I can show you, so instead of sending you individual graphs for 2007 for each site, I thought maybe it’s best to consolidate the sea lice trends (attached a chart called “MHC BA mean numbers of sea lice 04-08”) that shows the levels of sea lice on our fish (Marine Harvest specifically) over the last few years. It is specific to the area of farming known as the Broughton Archipelago. We are producing the same charts for other areas of operation (Campbell River, Port Hardy), but I can tell you know the trend and prevalence of sea lice is very similar. You’ll see there is a reduction in sea lice numbers each year, both inside and outside of that management period (March-June). The fact that the outside period (July-February) is also lowering over these years would suggest that the natural sea lice levels in the area of study are lowering for other reasons than a salmon farmer’s sea lice management. Regardless, it’s good news for wild and farmed salmon. I intend on posting this graph on our website soon, just for the reason you mention in your letter – historical data that gets erased from the website when we move to a new year-class of fish.

I’ve also attached a chart (Slice 1996-2008) which shows the Slice usage by the entire industry over the past decade. It averages around 0.1 - 0.2 grams per metric tonne of salmon produced. 2007 was an average year at about 0.13 grams/tonne. To put that into context, the industry has averaged about 75,000 tonnes of production so the average usage of emamectin benzoate is about 11-15 kgs (24-33 pounds) annually.”

Are they taking YOU and everyone in Canada to be a fool… or is it just me?

I am not sure if there are any meaningful “individual site” information provided to anyone, including DFO. If there is, why are they sharing?

Yes, Canada inspectors have access to it, but do they really understand what they are looking for and are they retaining, as needed to make a proper decision? I am not sure!

It appears Marine Harvest is generating “ combined site information” and “sub-zone” reports, which indicates everything is well within environment and all limits are within Canadian law. When I ask Ian Roberts (MHC) about individual information and that MHC states they have been posting the information since 2004, then why is that information NOT showing on their website, as stated? He went back to the statement above, “historical data that gets erased from the website when we move to a new year-class of fish.” and he added they only post data on active farms and remove inactive farm data.

I question that? To my knowledge there are 18 Marine harvest fish farm sites in the Campbell River area, with only 7 listed on their website. Are there really 11 Marine Harvest farms fallow and inactive in Campbell River area, that is hard to believe!

Again, it is my belief they are screening, adding, and removing the information they don’t want the public to see. Here just one example, I am quite sure there are several more:

This is two charts of theirs I have put together for comparison. No information was changed and I have both charts. The chart on the right is what is currently on their website. The chart on the left contains the information they removed. Since Potts Bay was not inactive or fallow, why did they remove the negative information? I will let you form you own opinion.

Now, back to SLICE, if SLICE has not been approved by the U.S. FDA – that means any use of this drug on “Food Fish”, to be consumed by humans, cannot legally be brought in to the United States?

If the FDA did indeed put three companies on an “import alert”, which required that they prove shipments were drug-free. And, since Marine Harvest has “publically” acknowledging that it is being used on the Atlantic salmon… guess what, that is now illegal to import into the United States, is it not? Why is it still being imported?

So, I absolutely and definitely have some questions, I will be asking not only Norway, Canada, but now the United States, Washington, Safeway, Costco, and anyone else importing and retailing Atlantic Salmon in this Country. I do not believe it matters if it is “safe” or “not”, nor whether there are any residual effects or not, I am under the impression once any unapproved drug is administered, it is illegal to import. Is that not correct?

Why do we have an FDA that is allowing “any” products, not meeting FDA approval to be imported, under “any” circumstances and being consumed by the United States populace? First this, then what next? Why are United States Taxpayers paying for U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA), when they don’t seem to be enforcing “our” laws? And, why isn’t Washington doing anything about it?

The PEW Charitable Trust wrote a letter on April 23, 2009 U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA)

http://www.pewtrusts.org/uploadedFiles/ ... Salmon.pdf ; copy attached, which states:

“I am writing on behalf of the Pew Environment Group to call your attention to the use of drugs unapproved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) in farmed salmon imported from three countries into the U.S. market. Specifically, we have evidence of the following: Canada, Scotland and Norway all use the pesticide emamectin benzoate to treat sea lice. In addition to emamectin benzoate, Scotland and Norway use other unapproved drugs to treat sea lice. Further, Norway uses several unapproved antibiotics—including oxolinic acid and flumequine. We also understand that the FDA has allowed the domestic farmed salmon industry in Maine to use emamectin benzoate on an experimental basis since 2006. None of these drugs are approved for use in aquaculture and all are of concern due to various environmental and human health risks associated with them. We urge the FDA to take appropriate action to explore the validity of the evidence provided within this letter and to seek immediate remedies.”

Then I reading, “SLICE” is a “required treatment” in British Columbia, where it was legalized. BC Salmon Farmers Association states:

“Once motile sea lice levels reach 3 lice per fish, the company must treat with a medicine called SLICE. All treatments (for SLICE or antibiotics) are prescribed by a licensed veterinarian. A SLICE treatment is similar to a dog or cat flea treatment.”

Now I go to the Department of Fisheries Canada and read the following statements:

Canadian Aquaculture Industry - Future Potential

“The Canadian aquaculture sector is positioned to benefit from a variety of factors that, collectively, present the necessary components for expanded production and competitiveness in domestic and international markets. With the world’s longest coastline and largest system of freshwater lakes and rivers, Canada has an aquatic resource base that is capable of sustaining a significant increase in aquaculture production. Additionally, Canadian producers benefit from proximity to the world’s largest seafood markets in Asia, the EU and the United States of America; particularly the latter.


Actually, the United States is the largest market for Canadian aquaculture, and Canadian products benefit from strong consumer support. Moreover, due to the limited domestic opportunity to expand capture fisheries and minimal growth potential in aquaculture, the U.S. is increasingly dependent upon imported seafood. Imports now account for more than 81% of total U.S. fish and seafood consumption, generating an annual trade deficit in excess of US $9 billion5. Driven by population increases and favourable demographics, U.S. seafood consumption has been rising over the past decade and could exceed 9 kg/yr per capita by 2020, fuelling demand for an additional 1.4 million tonnes (live weight) of fish and seafood products.”

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/li ... sa-eng.htm


As I am trying to find my answers I run across several articles both pro and con of the use of these drugs. These are documents that describe SLICE (emamectin benzoate) as being “very toxic to marine organisms”. Plus, there seems to be some other chemicals in question? Oxolinic acid and Flumequine, which are both are antibiotics that seem to be used, “indiscriminately”? There is a belief “indiscriminate and unnecessary” use of antibiotics around the world has led to “super bugs” — bacteria resistant to a broad range of antibiotics.

The last information I could find was, ‘The New York Times’ reported that the documents obtained by Pew were verified as authentic, by Donald Kraemer, FDA deputy director for food safety and Mr. Kraemer advised that the FDA put three companies on an “import alert,” which required that they prove shipments were drug-free. And, I further read, once any non approved drug was administered, it was not allowed to be imported to the United States, even and regardless of any residual effects having worn off?