TRANSCRIPT - Alexandra Morton
Morton is a registered professional biologist living in the
heart of the Broughton Archipelago.
Can you speak about the possibility of biological pollution with
regards to disease and sea lice of salmon?
I've been here
for 18 years, and I came here to study the top predator, which is
the killer whale, the Orca. When you study the top predator, as
a biologist, you become very aware of the whole food chain underneath.
What I am seeing is warning signs flashing at all different trophic
layers, the plankton, the salmon, and the killer whales. The whales
are gone; they were the first things to leave. It's very obvious
to me, and while my expertise was not bacteria, viruses and parasites,
it has become that in the last few years.
What's your concern about the Atlantic salmon escapes?
I actually just
started this on a lark. I thought I'm going to count how many Atlantic
salmon the commercial fisherman are catching and compare that number
with the Dept. of Fisheries and Oceans count. I hounded the guys.
I called them on the radio; I went up to their boats. In 17 days,
I recorded that over 10,000 fish were caught. I opened up 700 of
them, and in some locations, 24%, a quarter of those fish, were
eating wild food. This wild food included herring and salmon.
That tells me
that Atlantic salmon are feeding, which is essential for their survival
and colonization, but they're also competing with the wild salmon
by eating herring, and they are predator to our wild salmon by eating
the young salmon themselves. Those two things right there give you
some warning. But, you've got to look at the role of the Atlantic
salmon in the Atlantic. That's the only salmon. There is one Atlantic
salmon, that's it. Here, we have 5 different species, and some would
They have this
amazingly intricate dance of who goes into the river when, and what
type of gravel they use. They've learned to maximize every square
inch of our rivers of all different types. Aggressive species like
the Atlantic displace other competitors, and that's why it's the
only species of salmon in the Atlantic. You throw that into a fine-tuned
system like we have here, and that is literally like throwing a
wrench into the gears. Parts are going to fly out all over; you
couldn't even predict where they will land.
What are the problems there? It sounds as if the Atlantics could
take over their breeding grounds?
There are all
kinds of problems. When the salmon go into the river there are lots
of behaviors that are happening between the different species, and
the Pacific salmon keep the fights in the family. The Chinook attacks
the Chinook and the Coho attacks the Coho. But, the Atlantics have
this behavior where they're more likely to attack a different species
than their own. They get into the spawning grounds and they disrupt,
if they do find a female to take over, her eggs will become useless
and lost. There's a big problem in a lot of our rivers where the
habitat's now wide open and ready for invasion.
industry have told me over and over we tried to introduce Atlantics
back in the 30's, the 20's, and the 40's. That was a whole different
situation. They were putting, little fish into rivers that were
already full of Pacific fish. Now, we have Atlantics that have been
in the Pacific for several generations, they're escaping as full-grown
fish. All they have to do is make it into a river and spawn, and
they're doing that. I mean, Dr. Volpe has found that out. There
are several generations of wild spawned Atlantics already in the
creeks. If you were concerned about our wild salmon, you would never
let this species invade.
Salmon farmers comment that if there's an escape here and there,
as long as they're on top of it, and those escapes are infrequent
enough, there's no real danger to Pacific salmon. How many farms
are there and to what degree are salmon escaping, or have they escaped?
They tell me
this is the heaviest fish farmed area in the world, and I wonder
how in the heck I ended up here. There are 30 right in this 100
square mile area. They're in small narrow channels. So the effect
of them is condensed and channeled. The term risk is going to mean
something different to the person who is invested in wild salmon
vs. farmed salmon. When they say there is no risk, they mean there
is no risk to their own fish. They don't mean there's no risk to
the wild fish, because all over the world, this lesson gets hammered
into us again and again; the rabbits in Australia, the zebra mussel
and on and on. Invasions of exotic species are costing the American
public millions of dollars to try and deal with. We're thinking,
no, it's not going to be a problem this time. But, there's no evidence
that it won't be a problem.
We've been on some farms with Nutreco, and then with Bill Vernon,
where they're not raising Atlantic salmon. They're raising Chinook.
Is the problem solved?
No, it often
sounds like a good solution, but while Atlantics are likely to be
a problem, domestic Pacifics are guaranteed to be a problem. They
have experienced this in Norway, and in Scotland, and in places
where they have wild Atlantics, and the farmed
Atlantics get in and they dilute that essential genetic code that
allows that fish to deal with that river. The fish in the river
are like a key in a lock. They have been honed to each other over
the millenniums since the glaciers receded. You cannot take a pink
salmon from one river and throw it in another and get returns. We
know that. So it's very essential that there's no mixture.
Do you have other concerns with regards to escapes that I haven't
asked you about, or other general concerns?
One of the biggest
concerns for me with the escapes is that you've now got a fish that
was raised on a farm and has undergone the husbandry procedures
of that farm, which includes vaccination from different viruses,
exposure to different bacteria, and application of pesticides. That
animal can now swim free and go right into the nursery grounds of
the Pacific carrying whatever they were dealing with on the farm.
Now, furunculosis and bacterial kidney disease are caused by very
deadly bacteria to both the Atlantics and the Pacifics, but when
you treat an Atlantic with antibiotics he can often survive, but
he remains contagious. So then you've got this messenger taking
bacteria right into the place that the wild salmon are most susceptible.
They're a real disease factor.
A few people say that these diseases are out there, it's really
the wild fish that are giving them to our farmed fish. They comment
that their fish may bring diseases into the waters of the wild fish,
but they're used to dealing with them.
If they want to avoid these diseases they should put their farms
on land, it would be beneficial to their fish too. If you stand
on a football field with a person with a cold, you're less likely
to get that cold than if you stand in an elevator for 4 hours with
10 other people who are very sick with the same cold. That's the
principle. When the wild fish go by it passes the pathogen to the
farm, it multiplies, and the nets prevent any predators from taking
these sick fish out.
We almost never
see sick wild fish because they're grabbed. The seals, the whales,
the birds, and the sharks get them. So that pathogen is at the end
of its role. But, in the farm situation, they're coddled, they're
drugged, they're protected. In the words of a Norwegian scientist,
the salmon farms are pathogen-culturing facilities. They get it
from the wild, but then they amplify it. And this is the real problem
we're seeing here. They've all got orange helmets on. This is quite
an operation; they've got boxes of something.
Are they all standing there checking us out?
not even looking at us. These guys are dressed in contamination
gear. They got boxes of something that must've come in on the plane.
They're going to knock those fish out. They're going to do something
to them, but they've strung a tarp so we can't see.
You've talked about the biomagnification and apparently there's
a farm right behind us where they've got IHN. What are your concerns
the farm right across the channel put smolts in the water that they
had to kill because they were infected with IHN. Now, they told
us they got this from sockeye salmon, but in February there are
no sockeye salmon here, there's not even a run of sockeye salmon
in the fall here. So nobody could accept that explanation. Then,
they started to say the herring brought it in, but nobody had traced
any IHN to the herring here. It was just a total guess. They killed
all 1.5 million of that farm full of young fish. Before they did
that, because they left them in the water for 3 months, this farm,
just across the channel, suddenly had IHN. These fish were older.
The fish farm
company decided to try and grow them out. They have lots of lawsuits;
they have mort tubs sitting there. They're throwing the losses in
every single day, but they have just enough left that they're hoping
to be able to harvest them for human consumption. Now, IHN is very
similar to rabies. It's a fish form of rabies. It's killed by heat,
so when it gets into a mammalian body they tell us it will die.
But, as we all know, viruses mutate so personally I would not eat
those fish, and I would not eat any farmed fish because I see what
goes on here.
IHN is very contagious. They don't want any boats to go near, thinking
it will stick to our hulls. Meanwhile, all the little pink salmon,
the Coho and the Chinook are pouring past this farm because it's
located right in the place those fish like to school and stay. The
transmission potential to the wild fish is huge. Yes, this is a
normal disease, came from the wild originally, but it was not sitting
in 100,000 fish at this site ever before, and that is what is different.
We have watched herring swim right in through nets. It looked
like they were actually using the net cages as sanctuary maybe from
wild salmon or whatever their predators are. To what degree do,
not just salmon, other species of fish swim around something like
I don't really
know because the fish farmers won't let me get too close. They use
lights on their pens at night. Now, using lights has been banned
from the commercial fisheries, because the same boats that used
to use lights caught everything: octopus, sharks, and herring. They
caught everything they were looking for, but they caught the whole
food chain too. The fishermen that live in my community think that
the lights on these farms are attracting everything, the herring,
the predators, and they upset the whole balance of nature.
are normally spread out more at night, they're condensing. They
think there's a lot of interaction just between the wild fish. That's
unnatural. Also, people that have been on farms have told me they
see the young salmon go right through the nets, like you saw with
the herring. I collected lots of young salmon near fish farms. I've
looked at about 2000 young wild fish, and a lot of them have parallel
lines down their bodies. Something salmon-sized has bitten a lot
of these fish. There's a lot of interaction going on. But, because
I'm not allowed on the farms, I don't really know.
Is IHN communicable to other species of fish besides salmon?
Yes, it can
be transmitted to herring, we have huge herring runs in here, and
they're really essential for this whole ecosystem. Also, lots of
the fish that just remain in one place are the shine or perch and
tube snouts. They haven't looked at the whole gamut of species.
Not very much is known because it hasn't been a problem before.
You say that some of your lice research has been in the vicinity
of this farm?
Sound farm was one of my sample sites in my study on sea lice over
the last 2 years. The first year that I ran into the lice problem
I checked the whole area and found lice on fish throughout. I found
less when I got further away from the farms. This year I picked
3 sites near farms and 3 sites that were far from farms, and this
was one of the sites I checked. The lice situation on this farm
and the other 2 were horrific. There's no way in my mind that 90%
of the little guys (2.5 to 5 cm long) that are caught next to this
farm survive more than a few days after, because they were so heavily
infected with lice.
you talk a little bit about what is a lethal infestation of lice
on a salmon?
no research has been done on this species of salmon louse as it's
called in the Pacific because it's never been a problem before.
In the Atlantic, they've done a lot of work because wherever there
are salmon farms; the wild fish are dying of lice. There they've
come up with a number of 1.6 lice per gram of the fish's weight
kills it. The young Atlantics come out of the river at about 7 inches,
as opposed to our little pinks and chums that come out much smaller,
I mean they're about 1.5 inches when they first come out, and so
the lethal load here might actually be a lot less. But basically
if it has 1 louse on it at that age, it will die. These had up to
68 lice per fish!
what degree do you think lice infestation on young Pacific salmon
is responsible for the decline of the fish populations here?
I didn't know
what I was doing when I started studying lice, so I contacted people
in Norway and Scotland. They methodically taught me how to make
the collections, where to pick my sites, how to analyze all of this,
and they're actually working on the papers with me. Under their
direction over the last 2 years now I've looked at about 2700 small
fish, both in this area and much farther North on the coast. If
you go several hundred miles north to Prince Rupert, 550 fish, little,
young pink salmon that I looked at there, there was 3 lice only,
and it was a different species.
You go down
to Bella Bella, where there were a couple of fish farms, everything
was fine, except in the channel where the fish farms were adjacent
to Jackson Powers. You come down into the Broughton Archipelago,
and you have to catch a salmon, a baby salmon, shortly after it's
come out of the river, and they look fine. But, as soon as you approach
the farm, 78% were infected at or above the lethal level. I'm being
generous here. So this year, it's just catastrophic. The runs have
declined by 99%, but only in the rivers that go by these fish farms.
To the North,
they are bountiful, they're doing great, there's more coming back
than they expected. To the south, they're down a little bit too;
those fish are also going by fish farms. Because, they're looking
at a much broader, expansive waterway, Johnson Straits, they are
not down nearly as much. They're down to maybe a ¼ or a ½
of what they expected. But here, we have less than 1%. We expected
5 million pinks to return, and we didn't even get 30,000. This is
hugely significant to this area because the pink salmon go to sea,
collect the product of ocean photosynthesis from thousands of square
miles and they carry it right back up the river.
of the other salmon species, the adults die, their bodies feed the
river and their babies come out of the gravel and go straight to
sea. They don't feed in the river at all. So all the wealth of fertilization
that the pink salmon bodies have done feeds the baby Chinook, the
baby Coho, the baby Steelhead, the trout, and of course the bears.
The phosphorus of pink salmon has been found in mountain goats!
It's just this amazing surge of protein and nutrients up the hillsides
that these fish provide for this area. So without them we have nothing.
Until recently, the pink salmon were doing incredibly good.
lice, are they possible vectors for disease?
We know that
sea lice are vectors for disease. There's been research in Europe
and they've shown that the causative agent for furunculosis has
been isolated in lice that are jumping off of the farmed fish. Also
a very dangerous virus called Infectious Salmon Anemia is running
through Chile, Scotland, Ireland, Norway, and New Brunswick, everywhere
but here. I'm just waiting for it to show up here. Sea lice can
spread that virus. When you have any parasite that is drilled into
the flesh, or eating the mucus of one animal and it jumps to another
animal, you have a direct vector for that disease to jump.
Looking at the
number of lice that were all over these fish was one thing that
really concerned me. Not only are these young pink salmon covered
with lice, they're bleeding from the gills, from the eyeballs, and
in the base of their fins. These are classic fish disease symptoms,
and I'm not a fish pathologist, but there's something else going
on here in addition to the lice. I just haven't had the wherewithal
to figure out what it is.
heard it's not good to site a fish farm near the mouth of a river
and expect everything to be okay. In an inland waterway, is that
really a solution?
No, it's not,
because we watch the debris in here, the logs and all that, and
none of it ever gets out. It just goes back and forth with these
tides. We've got the pressure of the rivers coming out and the force
of the Pacific coming in, and it holds everything in here. I was
astounded with the sea lice issue where you can actually see the
damage; it's not like a virus where it's much harder to find. In
the range beyond the farm, you found sea lice that were up to 10
miles away from the farm.
The only thing
that would have worked in here was maybe to have 5 farms total,
and a much lower density of fish. They should try to meet the natural
laws under which fish have survived here over eons, which is a lower
density. I pleaded strongly with the government; make this a corporation
archipelago, because there's not room for 2 of them. Of course,
they didn't listen. The other thing I argued for going back 12 years
now was to keep one migration route for the wild fish open.
If you have
a problem, like we're seeing right now, only 1/2 the rivers would
be dead. What we're facing right now is right from Kingcom Inlet
and all of Tribune Channel. All of our rivers are stricken. Unless
these salmon farms are off the migration routes of the young fish
by this spring, that's it, they're toast. They just will not come
back. And that's what the fishery managers tell me. People whose
whole lives are based on raising pink salmon, they say, when you
lose your pink salmon run, you have lost it. Just putting a farm
a little distance from a river is not enough.
What do you make of the DFO lifting the moratorium on fish farms?
This is not
a scientific decision. This is a political decision. The way I see
it, the politicians of British Columbia have trouble negotiating
for the wild salmon. The reason for that is the wild salmon need
the watersheds, they need the coastal waters, and they need the
open ocean. That means your average politician has to say no to
the loggers, no to the miners, no to the people who want to put
dams in the river, and no the ones that want to divert water down
to the United States. They have to negotiate with the United States
and the open Pacific stocks, and they're just saying 'to heck with
it.' Here we've got a salmon that doesn't need the watersheds and
doesn't go to sea.
We can have
our salmon, and wreck the place too. You know, for years, I could
not understand the decision process that was going on here. They
came into my community and they said, tell us where you don't want
fish farms; we won't put them there. The commercial fishermen and
the sport fishermen of this area said 'no, we're not going to participate
in that process.' I said, 'you guys, this is it, this is your last
chance, tell them.' So, for whatever reason they went out and they
showed them on charts where the wild salmon like to be. The government
made a chart of the area and they had red, yellow, and green.
of a red zone, they said, would not even accept an application for
a fish farm. We looked at the map and we'd lost some, we'd won some
but most of the people felt pretty good about it, because all the
wild salmon migration routes were protected. Within 2 years, there
were more salmon farms in the red zones than there were anywhere
else. It was such a betrayal of public trust to steal these people's
knowledge about where the wild fish are and then they put the salmon
farms right there, because they new that those were the most bioproductive
areas in the whole area. That's why we're having the severe problems
we're having now.
What about the people who mention that cod stocks, for instance,
are not a stable supply of fish and that the farms are a steady
supply. What's your response to that kind of thinking?
by that kind of thinking, because the wild salmon are not going
extinct on this coast. That is a myth that DFO is trying to perpetuate.
The sockeye salmon were a pound and half more in weight this year.
They came on in numbers that were over the historic numbers. They've
never seen so many sockeye in the river right now as they have down
in Frazier this year. The pink salmon, until this year, were getting
bigger every year and more abundant. Open ocean survival is really
favoring salmon right now.
We do go through
these 'on/off' cycles and it's been recorded through history, but
we're in an 'on' cycle right now. The DFO should never be trusted
with anything, considering what they did with those East coast stocks.
As I understand it, the commercial fishermen were saying the fish
are getting smaller, the fish are getting smaller, and what did
the DFO do? They invested in these trawlers, the nets were so big
it took 2 boats to drag them, and they wiped them out. And you know
what they put on the Grand Banks? They put oil wells. That's part
of the story here too.
You go and you
look like you're doing something, but really, you're just letting
this fishery be wrecked. Then you get rid of your commercial fishermen
who are the only strong voice for the wild fish, and then you can
do whatever you want with the corporations. Sure enough there's
oil pressure here too. They want to drill on this whole coastal
shelf. To say that the wild fishery is something we can do away
with is something that the future generations are really going be
angry about, because corporate food production is one big experiment.
They think they've
mastered those little bugs, but the viruses, the bacteria; they're
having a heyday. They love the high densities. Those corporate farmers
are breaking the natural laws and releasing these little devils.
We are going to be looking at wild food production pretty closely
in the coming decades. The pink salmon, in particular, are probably
the cleanest protein left on earth because they are a 2-year fish
and they feed very low on the trophic level. So, to say were going
to allow them to go extinct, I think there should be a world body
that just doesn't allow this.
your take on community development and salmon aquaculture?
When the salmon
farms first approached my community, we thought it was a great idea,
and I thought it was a great idea. I thought it would bring more
children, because we have a little school that's always threatened
with closure. I thought there would be more jobs; I thought there'd
be less pressure on the wild fish. I loved the idea that there'd
be people throughout this area where I could take shelter in a storm.
They were so reasonable at first. The fish farmers came to our elders
in our community and said, 'where do you think we should put farms
to avoid a problem?'
sent out these teams and they went and brought us these maps and
said, 'show us where you don't want farms, we won't put them there.'
It looked great. But then, once they got their feet in here, they
just took over. They put the farms wherever they wanted. Whenever
there was conflict, it was always the commercial fishermen that
lost. They have no children in our school. They don't buy fuel at
our gas stop. We don't have any jobs at the moment that are coming
from our community to the farms.
On these fish
farms, I've heard of cases where one person's looking after 2 farms.
Farms that are left fallowed are just sitting there unmanned. It
has not been an economic boom. We are a community that depends on
wild fish. We have sport-fishing lodges, we have commercial fishermen,
and we have tourism. All of those things have taken a big hit. Most
of the lodges have moved out. People just don't come here. The few
that are left are struggling because we have a reputation for having
lost our wild fish.
your take on the disposal of mortalities?
the farmed fish that have died and no longer are suitable for human
consumption into the ocean environment is such an unenlightened
and silly idea. It would be like taking dead chickens and throwing
them in on top of the neighbor's pig farm. What's happened is they've
thrown these on top of a black cod fishery. Whatever these fish
died of is now going to transfer to the black cod community and
to whatever fish that are out there. To look at a body of water
and think 'this is a place to throw dead things' is really ridiculous.
Actually, when you look out over a body of water, it's like looking
out over 5 levels of the Serengeti Plain. You've got your shrimp
level, pollock level, bottom fish, all your plankton, salmon, and
herring. So, what are you going to do? Throw dead stuff in there
like it's a trashcan? That is just a recipe for disaster.
towing cages where there were dead fish?
It's just biological insanity. If they were in fact towing those
pens from Larsen, or any farm in this area, you are now spreading
the problem. The thing about Johnson Straits is that is the main
highway for all the sockeye, and the pinks and the Chinook and the
Coho and now the chums that are pulsing through to the lower rivers.
They are contaminating a body of water that is now full of wild
fish that are on their way to the spawning grounds. So, whatever
is emanating off of that is going to be taken right into the nurseries
of the Pacific fisheries. That is sheer biological insanity.
something you're concerned with in regard to aquaculture and whales?
I came in here
in 1984 following a pod of whales. I'd been looking for a place
to study whales year round. This place was perfect. It had whales
and it had all the salmon-the full house of predators. I began working
year round following the killer whale families through this area.
The fish farms started playing underwater sounds to keep seals away.
The sounds were designed to actually hurt the seals' ears. As is
often the case, prey and predator, the seal and the whale, have
the same hearing range and so it was like the door was slammed in
They just quit
coming. One family after the next would just come in here and turn
around and flee. This is a violation of the fisheries act. There's
a $100,000 fine every time you make a whale move, or a jail term.
I started to leave because all the whales were gone. Up until now,
I'd been working closely with the Department of Fisheries &
Oceans, because I was in an area they couldn't cover. We did lots
of exchange of information. I've co-authored papers with them. But,
suddenly when I reported this problem it was like, 'no it can't,
it can't be.'
But, the whales
were gone. So now I study the absence of whales. I thought a lot
about moving, since it has derailed my life. I came to study the
communication between whales in the wild, which is a fascinating
subject. But when they displaced the whales I had to think, 'should
I go to Alaska?' I really wish I had gone to Alaska right from the
get go, but I felt badly to bail out on the whales. So, trying to
make this place habitable for the whales again is my whole purpose
still using these acoustical devices here?
They say they're
not. They're certainly not using them in my area. The only way you
can tell if there's one on is if you have an underwater listening
device, which most people don't have. I really don't know the status
of them up and down the coast. They're still not outlawed. The farmers
can use them if they want.
you say something about the escapes?
common here. The escapes that I have actually known about have all
occurred in calm weather. It's never been a storm or boat running
into the nets. It's been their boats backing into it, ripping it
with their propellers. It's been big tides that they just weren't
prepared for. I remember one huge escape right into Johnson Straits.
A fellow had forgotten to put a screen into the packing boat and
the fish had just leaked out. In 2000, when I was surveying the
fishermen, they were catching 200 Atlantic salmon a day in their
nets and they still had the little pellets that they feed them on
Apparently, a pellet only lasts a matter of a half a day in a fish's
So, we knew
these fish were coming out, because the first day of the fishery
they had pellets. On the second day of the fishery they had pellets,
and the fish farmers said, 'no we don't have a hole.' Then they
took a look, and they're like, 'oh excuse me, actually we think
we've lost about 30,000 fish.' They didn't even know they had a
hole. So, I don't see how anyone could say that it's not a problem,
or that it's been solved. Maybe it's been solved since yesterday,
but certainly not in the last 2 years. They're losing on average
about 40,000 fish per year.
up in the Bering Sea. I did an inventory of Atlantics this year
and it's the same story. When I survey all the fishermen, pretty
soon you get a couple of epicenters. So, there was an event to the
West and they all caught all these big spotted Atlantics. Then,
there must have been an event in Johnson Straits, because the farther
and farther I went east and interviewed the fishermen, the more
and more farmed Pacific salmon there were. These fish were a nightmare.
They had Chinook mouths and Coho tails, or Coho mouth and a trout
Or, they look
like a Chinook, but they were covered in spots. Someone's messing
with these guys genetically and I don't know if they've gone public
with that. There have been other mysterious genetic mixtures. In
2000, I was collecting the Atlantics off the fishermen. They look
like sockeye. In fact, my neighbor said he would eat his shirt if
there were no sockeye genetic material in these Atlantic salmon.
I have gradually found labs all over the place and I've gotten different
samples here and there trying to figure out what they've done with
Is this crossbreeding or GMO?
I don't know
what these are. They appear to be crossbred in some cases between
Atlantic and Pacific. For example, one company here has bred all
the spots off of their Atlantic salmon and those are the ones that
look like sockeye. Nobody knows what these fish are, they don't
know if they're a Chinook or a Coho. I don't know if that's done
by interbreeding or genetic manipulation. As a matter of fact, every
time one of these issues comes up, I don't know anything about it.
So, what I do
now is I get a problem like the shrimp draggers, they phoned me
one day 2 years ago and they said we have extraterrestrial stuck
to the eyeballs of our fish. So I've got to check this out. Sure
enough, the sole had like palm trees growing out of their eyeballs.
Most of the guys had never seen this. One guy said he had seen it
once before, that he had seen one fish with it. I get on the Internet,
and I find somebody whose whole life is that, whether it's tumors
or sea lice or parasites or viruses. Then I say to them, what kind
of samples do you need? Then I just go out there and I collect them.
In this way, I am trying to shed light on these various issues.
When the government
and the fish farming industry says there's been no evidence of transfer
of disease from the farm fish to the wild, I know that the reason
they can say that is because they haven't looked. They have found
no evidence because they have not looked for evidence. So, now I've
made it my life to try and find that evidence, get it published,
hold it up, because I think the public will be shocked when they
find out what's in these fish and the impact that they're having
on the environment.
your message to the consumer?
is the only hope for this ecosystem. If they fuel the farmed salmon
organism by buying it, then that's what will grow. If they want
to fuel the wild system, they need to put their money to the wild
fish. Personally, I would never feed one of these things to anybody,
my children, anyone I like, even an enemy, for 2 reasons. One, I've
cultured bacteria out of these fish that's alarming: E.coli, serratia,
enterococcus, and streptococcus. But also, if you look at the phyla
of farmed salmon you will notice this road band of white.
the fat. Everyone on earth today has to really look at where they're
getting their fat. Because the toxins with which we've glazed this
planet with are binding to the fat molecules, and you want to get
your fat from as low on the food chain as you can. So, those white
streaks in the fish are warning signs that there's going to be PCBs,
there's going to be other toxins, and you want your leaner wild
fish that's been feeding out in the open ocean where it's a lot