DUDE-Where's my Ocean?

[Jimmy Carl Black]

Did this disturb anyone else?

ocean-steading

[ 12-23-2003, 05:37 PM: Message edited by: Jimmy Carl Black ]

[Orca]

Very Disturbing indeed -

The page cannot be displayed
The page you are looking for is currently unavailable. The Web site might be experiencing technical difficulties, or you may need to adjust your browser settings.

[Jimmy Carl Black]

Works now. My 'puter crashed mid-edit.

[kenai]

Very disturbing, Money rules in the present climate and it sounds like a forgone conclusion that this is gonna happen. We need to watch our politicians carefully on this one, if not, anyone want to join me on leasing stonewall banks. We can post it and have pay for fish just like the ranches do for upland birds.

[HOGGEMIN]

This can't be allowed :shocked:

[KeyWest]

I don't like this at all. But, knowing what is happening is 1/2 the game. The other 1/2 is acting on the information. Do we have, or want to develop a plan to act?

[Pilar]

Fish farms are located in sheltered waters for a very good reason.

Sometimes, on our coast anyway, the ocean is in charge. From November to May every year. Imagine the loss of capital if a wind event or heavy storm wiped these floating farms out? Or the environmental damage the nets and debris would cause. Not to mention strays, alien (genetic engineered) species with no population checks in the food web, introduced diseases and the billions of tons of fish turds and wasted feed.

I love the bit about excusing oil companies from dismantling offshore oil rigs for decommisioning and paying them to convert their hazardous industrial waste into fish farms. George Bush helps the oil industry? Nah, couldn't happen.

Please consult over 400 years of popular literature on the outcome for folks who think they can build something that the sea cannot take apart.

Also think about the complete lack of oil drilling platforms off our shores.

[ 12-24-2003, 09:46 AM: Message edited by: Pilar ]

[Beer Waggin]

The Scandinavian country has mastered salmon farming and exported it around the world.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">Yah, they have this figured out alright. They can't even hold fish in a semi-protected environment and now they think they can do it on the open ocean?
We'll pay for this in the end with taxes and destroyed fisheries.

[The Bad Fish]

like pilar said,, i would like to see your fancy red snapper ranch come the november 35 ft swells and serious destruction the ocean can do.

[stick flicker]

The first thing that comes to my mind is that cooperate america is trying make a profit. The large cooperations are the only ones able mass produce to get costs low enough to make a profit. This is going to be at the cost of enviorment,biodiversity,pollution,overnight operations??? The aquaculture business is very competitive with the current effort of countries like Chile, Norway, and Canada. Look at what thier countries have gained or loss. I know they have proved that the little guy can't make it.
I don't see how we can do a better job than the ocean ecosysytem. I know I don't want my ocean to turn into a massive monoculture. Why not preserve our native fishes and work on getting a stainble harvest level in place.

[Uglygreen]

Not sure I agree with you folks on this one. Im sitting on the fence for now. Along with the down-sides already discussed, there are a bunch of huge potential up-sides on this one as well.

UG

[WildHawg]

Stirring the pot eh Ug :tongue: ??
I, for one, fear the potential downside of such ventures. You of all people know I'm no freakin' liberal--but it would take a whole bunch of good scientific data and alot of research before I could ever choose such a path.
As the population of the earth expands--I fear our oceans will be exploited to the breaking point. I doubt I will be around to see it.
I'm in no hurry thanks...

[Metal Manipulator]

I wonder how they will feed these fish. There sure won't Be any feed source left around these cages. Ane if they are feeding them drug laiden food then the genetic stability or survival of the fitest will no longer be with the farmed fish and the surrounding area affected by currents. One million question's later even if answered won't cover it all. There are lots of land around the world that is not utilized so we have a long way to go before we need the Oceans to sustain us.

[Smj]

Just a thought that popped into my head when the words "diseased" and "monoculture" were used: Substitute "forests" for "oceans" ???


"SOILENT GREEN IS PEOPLE"

Smj

[King Kong]

I have done some research on this and do not like it at all. The Norwegians have perfected the process for raising diseased salmon and are now working on many other species. The escapement is small in comparison to the number of fish being farmed, but huge on the impact it has had on the local fisheries. The local Norwegian fisherman are extremely worried that these diseased farm fish are going to wipe out their wild salmon population via disease or breeding with wild fish. I watched a report on this recently, cant remember the channel?, and the local fisherman stated that they were catching 3 farm fish to 1 one wild fish in their local river!!! Some people will make billions of dollars off of this industry. I for one am completely against it!! Why do we have to mess with mother nature??? Why pollute our ocean rather than preserve it? This will leave a long lasting negative impact on our lives and those that inherit it.

[Seefood Man]

Just from this brief info I think this will be a bad idea. My thinking is that if the current problems that already exist on the Columbia River system can't be fixed, then how does the government think that they can manage the ocean.

[Jimmy Carl Black]

Anyone wanting to ride the fence or fish around one in the future keep listening to the many potential upsides to this issue laid out by the powerful interests promoting it.

Not trying to be rude UG but I'm not personally going to support any fence riding on this issue.

The ocean belongs to all of us. This move goes too far.

[fish assassin]

Vote for George Bush!! He has a better idea!! NOT!! :depressed: :depressed:


-assAssin-

[Pilar]

PeterMac, good questions. Another question is will any of these considerations ultimately matter in the decision process.

MarkMc as always you are right on it ...

2) My understanding, from talking to a reliable source, is that the pens they refer to have NOT been weather-tested in open ocean waters. They have no idea what would happen when 30 - 40 foot swells roll through them.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">So, there is an element of 'wishful thinking' in this scheme.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. I'm trying to get my hands on the proceedings of a certain NOAA meeting where this idea was hatched by a certain aquaculture proponent within NOAA.

<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helv">And now we cut to the chase. I can't wait to hear more about this. What do you know about using the old drilling platforms or the possibility of really siting these farms off our shore? Thanks MarkMc.

[PeterMac]

Okay, going to throw a question out to you guys, don't beat me up too bad.

Now, an assumption must be made to answer this, and that is that fish farming on our planet is here to stay, in some form or fasion.

Okay that being said, wouldn't it be cleaner for the environment to get them out in the middle of the ocean rather than some confined, shallow inlet where wild, and hatchery, fish are forced to go by, where their debris can build up on the ocean floor, etc? It seems that the flushing of waste and disbursement of their hopped up food etc would be much greater. Also, talking on escapement, if these fish are raised out in the ocean, thereby not having the biological imprint of a home stream, where are they going to go if they get free?

Note that I am not in favor of fish farming either, and when I read the article I had many of the same reaction....These are just a couple thoughts.

Thanks (I think)
PeterMac

[Mark Mc]

Hi Peter, thanks for your reasonable questions.

A couple of responses -

1) This proposal is not about salmon ranching in the open, it is about raising deep-water species such as cod and halibut. So the escapees could immediately mix with the wild population.

2) My understanding, from talking to a reliable source, is that the pens they refer to have NOT been weather-tested in open ocean waters. They have no idea what would happen when 30 - 40 foot swells roll through them.

3) Here's something else I found out: they would broadcast the feed, so a high percentage of the feed would be "wasted". And of course this feed comes from anchovies/herring/sardines/krill... One of the problems with salmon farms is that they use a huge amount of fish protein (taken from the sea) to produce the fish they raise. With this open-ocean idea, it would be an even higher ratio of lbs of feed : lbs of fish produced.

This is only the tip of the iceberg. I'm trying to get my hands on the proceedings of a certain NOAA meeting where this idea was hatched by a certain aquaculture proponent within NOAA.

Later..... MM

[PeterMac]

Thanks Mark, I had overlooked that part - other species...

Happy Holidays.

PeterMac

[kamloops]

What is a Dude?

[Mark Mc]

Hi Pilar,

I was told by my "reliable source" at OR Sea Grant that the agreement the oil companies enter into require them to be responsible for their drill rigs as long as they are out there. Therefore, when the rig outlives it's useful life (well is "dry" or whatever), the oil company typically wants to remove the rig. So it appears as though this idea from NOAA to use decomissioned oil rigs to house fish farms has not been bought off on, in any way, by the actual owners of the rig, who by law would be responsible for it even years after becoming a fish farm. I'd love to know if an oil company's legal dept. would allow them to consider this, even for all the Franken-Cod McNuggets they could eat....

[Jimmy Carl Black]

dude