Environmentalists and scientists paid big money to hurt fish farms, says researcher
Dan MacLennan, Courier-Islander, Published: Friday, April 16, 2010
BC's fish farming industry is being badly outplayed and losing a public relations battle where huge U.S. foundations are paying environmentalists and scientists to hurt aquaculture in support of the Alaskan wild salmon fishery.
That was the basis of a presentation to Campbell River city council Tuesday night from Vivian Krause, a former aquaculture industry worker with a Masters degree in nutrition. "(The aquaculture industry is) being outplayed," Krause told the Courier-Islander after her presentation. "Their team's losing. They need to get better performance out of their players, or they need to get better players or they need a better coach.
"The aquaculture industry has got to accept that it's losing this game. If it wants to win it's going to have to play differently." Krause's allegations brought denials from Alexandra Morton, the David Suzuki Foundation and Dr. Martin Krkosek this week, but first a look at Krause and her presentation. A published researcher, Krause has worked with UNICEF on programs for maternal and infant nutrition.
During 2002 and 2003, she was a corporate development manager for Nutreco, then one of the world's largest producers of farmed salmon and salmon feed. In 2007, she served as a consultant to other salmon farming interests. Krause says she has not worked for the salmon farming industry since then.
While researching funding opportunities for a non-profit agency she now works for, unrelated to the aquaculture industry, Krause says she stumbled upon information in the grant databases of huge billion-dollar philanthropic U.S. foundations. Through subsequent research, including analysis of tax return information, Krause says she found millions of dollars from foundations such as the Pew Charitable Trusts and others being directed to researchers, marketing firms, environmentalists and anti-aquaculture campaigners in a effort to "deposition" and "demarket" BC aquaculture and increase market share for the huge Alaskan wild salmon industry.
"With the rise of salmon farming, the value of Alaskan salmon collapsed, from about $740 million per year to about $'25 million in 2002," she told city council. "That was because of the market impacts of aquaculture on the commercial fishing industry. "Since 2002, the value of Alaskan salmon has tripled.
Alaskans have acknowledged that this was due to many factors, but also the bad press over farmed salmon scared people away from it and swayed them back to wild salmon." The U.S. foundations, she said, have put millions of dollars into various facets of a multi-pronged effort to Odemarket' or shift consumers away from farmed fish, and to Odeposition' discrediting aquaculture by spreading fear, uncertainty, misinformation and doubt about the product.
Rather than simply singing the praises of wild Alaskan salmon, which dominates the North American wild salmon market "it would be much easier to sway consumers away from farmed salmon by depicting it as toxic, dyed, and dangerous which is precisely what Oenvironmental' organizations have been doing," she said. "As we know, with regards to PCBs in farmed salmon, contaminants and other issues, environmental organizations have very successfully scared a lot of people away from farmed salmon."
Krause said the pivotal research by the University of Alberta's Martin Krkosek et al, suggesting that sea lice originating from salmon farms put wild salmon at serious risk of extinction in the Broughton Archipelago, is the prime example of flawed science the selective use of data to reach unsupported conclusions. Krause says Krkosek, the journal Science which published his findings, and scientists who reviewed the research, all have connections to the U.S. foundations.
She says marketing groups working for the Alaskan salmon industry, assisted by environmental groups and individuals like the David Suzuki Foundation and noted fish farm critic Alexandra Morton, then spread the flawed conclusions to the media far more effectively than the aquaculture industry or other scientists who dispute those conclusions.
Krause said pink salmon returns to the Broughton actually increased after Krkosek and Morton predicted their extinction, proof that their science was flawed. "If research shows that sea lice originated from salmon farms put wild salmon at serious risk of extinction, then the farms should be closed," Krause said. "But when you take a look at the research closely you'll find this isn't what the research actually shows." Krause suggested a gathering of CEOs from the aquaculture industry and the U.S. foundations might help to break the present, destructive status quo.
"Until that happens, I think it's fair to expect that the reformers will do what they're paid to do, aquaculture will be thwarted, and communities including Campbell River will lose out on tax revenues and job opportunities that are badly needed." Afterward, Morton, Krkosek and Jay Ritchlin of the David Suzuki Foundation rejected Krause's message. Ritchlin said it's "just not true" that aquaculture critics are working for the Alaskan salmon industry or using flawed science.
"I work on salmon farming issues all over the world and in every jurisdiction the science is very similar," he said. "There are serious problems with fish farming, sea lice are a big issue. "We've based our work on peer-reviewed published science and we continue to advocate for changes that will protect wild fish from the effects of farmed salmon." "Vivian Krause has been on this subject for years," Morton said yesterday.
"She should fact-check. I am not receiving money from big US foundations. To suggest that this is all in aid of protecting the Alaskan fishery, when it's an issue that's occurring around the world is ignoring all of that." Morton rejected Krause's "fantastic story" about "an imaginary payroll." Morton said the science is sound and the extinction warning didn't come true because the research triggered "enormous" changes on the fish farms.
"It caused the province to set a limit on the number of lice that they are allowed to have when these young fish go by," she said. "That is why we still have some salmon left coming into the Broughton Archipelago. As soon as we shined the spotlight on them, those fish farmers cleaned up their act."
Krkosek said "both the University of Alberta and Science gave serious consideration to (Krause's) allegations and investigated the matter. Both institutions then dismissed the charges." "My research is not part of a conspiracy to deposition the BC aquaculture industry in favour of wild Alaskan salmon," he said. "My research program is an objective attempt at understanding and advancing the sustainability of wild and farmed salmon in BC. One outcome of the work is that there are negative effects of farmed salmon on wild salmon, which are now well understood. Another outcome is that the effects may be mitigated via management and policy change, which I am currently working on in collaboration with aquaculture companies, DFO, conservation organizations, and other academics." Krause's presentation brought qualified support from the aquaculture industry yesterday.
"We find this information very interesting and would like to thank Ms. Krause for her hard work in exposing this," said Marine Harvest Canada communications manager Ian Roberts. "We believe this information is very important for the public to see. Yes, Ms. Krause's findings are certainly concerning to us, but we believe our efforts are best spent providing our customers with a healthy, sustainable product." Roberts forwarded comment from BC Salmon Farmers Association communications manager Colleen Dane.
"We won't comment on Ms. Krause's presentation to council specifically, but we know that her research is very interesting and brings forward information that is important for the public to hear and consider in the ongoing debate about salmon farming," Dane said. "The protection of our coast is an important and complex debate with many voices weighing in. BC's Salmon Farmers agree that public discussion, including a variety of perspectives, is important. Ms. Krause's work is an example of another factor playing into the already-complex dialogue."
