IFish Fishing Forum banner
  • Are you passionate about fishing? Would you like to write about topics that interest you and get paid for it? Read all about it here!
1 - 20 of 28 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
909 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Ran accross this on a website. It is what they use to figure out what color they want to make the pen raised salmon meat. The pinker the more money they can get. Just add chemicals I have been lucky enough to have never purchased a salmon at the store. I no I will never purchase one now. http://www.ifish.net/uploads/401406113.jpg
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,363 Posts
Sick...

I've heard that pen raised salmon, if not given chemicals, has grey meat. Its the pigmentation in shrimp and other crustaceans that give fish meat the coloration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
672 Posts
The "chemicals" they use are exactly the same things that give "wild" fish its color. Have you ever caught a White King? That is a fish wich has very little of the red stuff in its diet.

Freddies, Kroger (QFC) are being sued right now over the use of these "chemicals". I hope the suit will be tossed out. It's rediculous. Here's a link It's in the PI

[ 04-24-2003, 10:36 AM: Message edited by: GutZ ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,021 Posts
The consumer drives this issue. How much fruit would be sold by the super markets if the producers did not make them look so good to eat.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
10,553 Posts
It's absolutely backed by the commercial fisheries, who are reeling (no pun intended) from the price impact of farmed salmon on commerical prices. Personally, I don't care for atlantic salmon, but the competition that pen raised fish provide have removed quite a bit of commercial fishing pressure on the river stocks.

However, a bigger, and more real issue than the coloration, is that the farm pens are ecological messes, and have caused severe pollution problems in some areas, notably some norweigian fiords, due to the food waste and feces that are concentrated in the area of the pen.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
Sure Catch,

On the idea that they feed the pen salmon "natural vitamins" to dye their flesh a healthy pink...not quite.

They feed them chemically produced dyes. Yes the dyes are, in theory, safe for human consumption but claiming they are "natural vitamins" is totally bogus.

Also keep in mind they feed them antibiotics and pesticides otherwise the fish would die from the conditions of the pens not the least of which is swimming and ingesting their own feces.

Farm raised salmon have about 10 times the antibiotic and pesticide level as natural fish plus the chemical dye to make them look like what they are not...healthy, natural salmon.

Even the good fat content on the meat is less.

Farm salmon are a bad idea. It could be done OK but then the profit ratio would be way down. Even if they were raised under healthy conditions that didn't require the pesticide and antibiotics, they would still have to be fed chemical dyes to make them look like natural salmon.

As for it reducing the pressure on natural fish, nope. It tends to have the opposite effect of driving the price down and pushing the commerical fishermen to catch more to make up in volume what they lose in price.

Also keep in mind that the penned salmon are fed fish meal which means the natural food for our natural salmon, also under pressure, is removed from the natural fish, lowering the natural fish population. The processing requires that farmed salmon require more bait fish than do natural fish, further depressing natural fish stocks.

It's in the salmon farmers interests that salmon restoration programs don't work and that is where they spend their lobbying dollars.

While we compete with the commercial fishermen for natural salmon, we do share a common interest with them in seeing salmon stocks restored and that is where the commercial fishermen spend their lobbying dollars, supporting the increase in natural salmon stocks that they and the sport fishermen depend upon.

I always ask in the supermarket and restaurant and don't buy farmed salmon.

Some links on problems with farmed salmon.

High PCB levels in farmed salmon

Each pound of salmon produced requires at least 3 pounds of wild-caught fish, challenging the presumption that fish farming necessarily reduces commercial fishing pressure. In fact, there is a net loss of protein in the marine ecosystem as a whole when wild catch is converted into meal for aquaculture consumption.

Schering-Plough Aquaculture's range of tried and tested products which prevent the common diseases threatening commercially farmed salmon include AquaVac™ Oral, Immersion & Injection vaccines, antiparasitic SLICE® and the immunomodulator Ergosan.

Love that last one...Schering-Ploughs advert for the various drugs you eat with your "healthy" farmed salmon.

Here's the drug company's dye production lobbying group.

Mera Pharmaceuticals, Inc. calls to readers' attention that some of the products, protocols and uses of astaxanthin which are described herein are or may be subject to various restrictions or limitations because of patents, exclusive or nonexclusive licenses, confidentiality agreements and other intellectual property or equivalent rights. Readers are advised to make an early and thorough investigation and inquiry into any product, protocol or use in which they may be interested, to see if any such rights might be applicable."

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
This lawsuit is pure crap. The "chemical" is a naturally occuring substance and is harmless. It is also used to make our chicken eggs have a more orange yoke. If you wont eat farm-raised salmon because of this "chemical" you better quit eating eggs as well. Here are some interesting points made by J.D. Wade in a recent article in the Reel News. He gave me permission to use this.

?Feeding salmon a food made of protein meal produces flesh a pale gray
Color. Certainly not something looking edible. Enter the dreaded "red dye".Astaxanthin and canthaxanthin ( hereafter in this piece called "A" and "C" ) are introduced into the feed. The names sound scary. The commercial fishing industry uses them freely.

There are more than 600 carotenoids in Nature, giving plants and
Animals pigmentation in varying colors ranging from yellow to red. "A" and "C" are the two carotenoids that wild salmon eat (via krill) to give their flesh/meat its pinkish-red colors.

Farmed Atlantic salmon eat synthetic versions of "A" and "C", which is
given to them in their feed (about 2.5 ounces per ton of feed.) These two man-made versions are not dyes. They are manufactured by chemical synthesis. The same chemical synthesis process producing vitamins humans consume every day.


Guided by the approval of the Food & Drug Administration (FDA), "A"
and "C" are manufactured by the same synthesis providing compounds identical to molecules produced by biological process in Nature.
When we eat fruits and vegetables we are eating carotenoids. When we take Vitamin C or Vitamin E, we are consuming chemically-synthesized versions of citric and ascorbic acids that Nature puts into plants. We have had long-term, daily experience with both carotenoids and chemically-synthesized vitamins. Since they are of similar origins, the FDA has given both the "A" and "C" used in salmon feed GRAS (Generally Recognized As Safe) status.


A number of years ago, people in Europe were misusing
chemically-synthesized "C" in order to get tans without sun bathing. To ensure safety, the FDA issued a maximum daily intake of "C". To reach the FDA's maximum daily intake level, a person would have to eat 32,812 pounds of farmed Atlantic salmon each day.?

I would bet dollars to dog t***s this suit is backed by the commercial fishermen
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
122 Posts
I Think Brion has made some good points. I'm personally not worried a bit about eating farmed salmon and rainbow trout because I know what they feed them. However, the whole fish farming business seems like a very bad idea in the long term because nature has provided a much better system for utilising the resources in natural salmon going out and eating surplus production and returning that to the rivers (and to us).
There are two important points about the farmed salmon that must be taken into account;1) the net cages are a huge source of sea-lice that infest wild smolts that migrate past the pens, causing a 400% increase in post-smolt mortality in several places. 2) Every year huge numbers of salmon escape from the pens (last year it was estimated to be 600,000 individuals from Norway and equal numbers from Scotland and Faroy Islands). The escapees outnumber the wild populations and in some rivers 70% of the spawners were escaped farmed salmon. Even here in Denmark 300 miles away from the nearest salmon farms, we had 20% escaped farm-salmon in some of our protected wild salmon rivers. Despite all the negative effects of fish farming, the FAO and the World Bank agrees that aquaculture is the only way to develop the worlds production of seafood, so all types of aquaculture are encouraged (subsidised) these days... it's sick!!
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
Great Dane,

I'm personally not worried a bit about eating farmed salmon and rainbow trout because I know what they feed them.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Ah...the Aquavac (tm) vaccines, anti-parasitic SLICE (tm) and immunomodulator Erogsan (tm) in your diet have been approved by your doctor?

It sounds like an anti-AIDS drug cocktail....brrrrr.

Despite all the negative effects of fish farming, the FAO and the World Bank agrees that aquaculture is the only way to develop the worlds production of seafood
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I'm not sure I'd accept the World Banks expertise on salmon restoration. Its expertise is in providing guarantees to bankers who lend to multi-national corps on risky development projects.

Here in the US/Canada Pacific Northwest, we know that we can restore salmon from the current 3M population (80% of that from hatchery spawn) to about 50% of the orginal run (16M), giving us 8M fish just in the Columbia River basin. Add in restoration in coastal rivers from California to Alaska and we acheive a huge boost in seafood production.

That kind of production in farmed salmon would be an ecological disaster just in the concentrated sewage issues in the coastal areas, if it was even possible.

Another case would be on US East Coast in Chesapeake Bay, a huge producer of seafood from turtles, oysters, crabs and fish in the past. If restored, it far surpasses any artificial production of seafood products.

Now if the World Bank was lending on ecological recovery projects like Pacific Northwest Salmon or Chesapeake Bay for restoration of seafood production, that would be a worthwhile project with a real future.

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
I do share some of the concerns expressed by other posters, but try to keep an open mind. For example, the use of antibiotics is, according to J.D. Wade, a thing of the past. This is what he said about that in his excellent article in the Reel News.

" In the early years, farms often suffered serious outbreaks of disease. That led to frequent use of antibiotics and to concerns about new strains of
drug-resistant bacteria that might pose risks to marine environment and human health. In the past 10 years, effective new vaccines have prevented
many disease outbreaks. That's enabled farms to substantially decrease the use of antibiotics. Medicated feed is used less than 5 percent of the time, far less than antibiotic use in the beef and poultry industries.

Feed originally consisted of ground carcasses of various aquatic species. It was inefficient, taking 3 pounds of feed to create 1 pound of product.

Today's technology has devised a food pellet consisting of a fish meal made of anchovy and herring (less then one pound for every pound of end
product) plus soy and wheat meals, producing
a meat fat content high in heart healthy Omega-3. When farmed Fish eat pellets made from small short-lived fish species, such as herring, they are
ensured a safe food supply, with non-detectable levels of mercury. Also, the areas where farmed
fish are raised are constantly monitored for pollution contaminants. In comparison, a wild salmon swims for years over thousands of miles where it is impossible to monitor water quality. Twice a day, the pellets are automatically dispensed in precise amounts, which are efficiently consumed.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,792 Posts
This whole thing is caused by the commerical fishing business.There is nothing wrong or harmful with pen raised salmon.Just the commericals crying. :blush:
Bob

[ 04-25-2003, 10:15 AM: Message edited by: dawhunt ]
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
17,213 Posts
I read that same JD Wade article.

Aside from the content, I found it very surprising that the REEL NEWS gave no background at all on the author - making it very suspect.

It appears to be written by someone on the payroll of the net-pen industry, as it continually puts the best spin possible on any of the controversial topics.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
I have known J.D. for years. He is a well respected journalist and an active member of the Northwest Outdoor Writers Association. He is most certainly not a shill for the salmon farmers. He is pretty adamantly opposed to many of the practices of the commercial salmon fishing industry.

In fact, J.D. and I are completly in opposition to each other on many issues, but I know him to be an honorable man. What he wrote, he belived.

He has written for the Reel news for years.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
I have known J.D. for years. He is a well respected journalist and an active member of the Northwest Outdoor Writers Association.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think it is a better source to listen to the doctors and biologists.

Since "J. D. Powers" is neither and he cites no sources, his "article" is pure opinion.

Against that we have the British Health Ministry, USDA, Schering-Plough Pharmacueticals, Mera Pharmaceuticals, Norwegian Health Ministry, NOAA Fisheries.

He is most certainly not a shill for the salmon farmers. He is pretty adamantly opposed to many of the practices of the commercial salmon fishing industry.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think you've just discovered the source of his opinions. A lot of sport fishing folks opposed to commericial fishing mistakenly look on farm salmon as a way to put the commerical fishermen out of business and get all the fish for themselves. Nothing scientific or factual about their stance, particuarly in regarding the health issues regarding pen raised salmon.

His claims of less usage of the antibiotics, vaccines, immunomodulators are directly contradicted by Schering-Ploughs success in selling those drugs to treat the pen raised salmon.

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Originally posted by BrionLutz:
</font><blockquote><font size="1" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">quote:</font><hr /><font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I have known J.D. for years. He is a well respected journalist and an active member of the Northwest Outdoor Writers Association.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think it is a better source to listen to the doctors and biologists.

Since "J. D. Powers" is neither and he cites no sources, his "article" is pure opinion.

Against that we have the British Health Ministry, USDA, Schering-Plough Pharmacueticals, Mera Pharmaceuticals, Norwegian Health Ministry, NOAA Fisheries.

He is most certainly not a shill for the salmon farmers. He is pretty adamantly opposed to many of the practices of the commercial salmon fishing industry.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">I think you've just discovered the source of his opinions. A lot of sport fishing folks opposed to commericial fishing mistakenly look on farm salmon as a way to put the commerical fishermen out of business and get all the fish for themselves. Nothing scientific or factual about their stance, particuarly in regarding the health issues regarding pen raised salmon.

His claims of less usage of the antibiotics, vaccines, immunomodulators are directly contradicted by Schering-Ploughs success in selling those drugs to treat the pen raised salmon.

Brion
</font><hr /></blockquote><font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Since "J. D. Powers" is neither and he cites no sources, his "article" is pure opinion.


One: His name is J.D. Wade. J.D. powes rates cars and such stuff.

Two: Because you are cite no sources and make no claims to be a scientist in the field, I must conclude that your comments are pure opinion.

Three: Not liking commercial fishermen doesn't invalidate his conclusions.

Four: Are you as concerned about all the antibiotics in beef and the food color to make your eggs more orange? If not why not?

Four
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,425 Posts
Surecatrch,

Two: Because you are cite no sources and make no claims to be a scientist in the field, I must conclude that your comments are pure opinion.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Since I did quote the sources to British Health Ministry, Schering-Plough etc. I guess you must conclude you forgot to click the links <grin>.

Schering-Plough's is the most interesting. You have this wild drug cocktail of vacines, antibiotics and immunomodulators which Schering is selling to the salmon farmers. Someone was saying "follow the money"...there's a nice trail there.

Wonder where all those drugs are going?

Brion
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,790 Posts
I think it is a better source to listen to the doctors and biologists.
<font size="2" face="verdana,arial,helvetica">Which ones? Are you saying dotors and biologists are universally opposed to aquaculutre or usimg dye in meats?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
672 Posts
The lawsuit is not about whether Farm Raised Fish is good or bad. It is about the stores attempting to deceive the customer about the contents of the fish. It is the same type of thing as suing McDonalds because their coffee is hot.

Brion;
So it takes 3 pounds of fish to make 1 pound of farm raised salmon. How much does it take to make 1 pound of "Wild" salmon :shrug:

Here is a website that presents things without a bias one way or the other. watershed-watch.org
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
152 Posts
Brion:

I saw no links, or I sure would have clicked them. I try hard to look at all sides of an issue. I am still undecided on this one. I am concerned about pollution from net pens and the possibility of the spread of disease. I am convinced that the "dye" issue is pure crap, and I think the antibiotics is as well, but am willing to keep looking.

I do know anyone with an economic interest i.e. fish farmers, commercial fishermen, and sports anglers, will tend to view things in the best possible light for their self interest. And, while we must rely on science to some extent, we must also be skeptics. Remember how many years the tobacco scientists assured us that cigarettes were complelty safe?

I went back and still see no links. Please post again, or e mail to me directly. Maybe its a problem with my browser?
 
1 - 20 of 28 Posts
Top