EarthTalk: Farmed Salmon vs. Wild

From time to time we publish articles of interest from EarthTalk, which is associated with E/The Environmental Magazine. 

Dear EarthTalk: What are the differences between farmed versus wild salmon when it comes to human and environmental health? -- Greg Diamond, Nashville, TN

Salmon farming, which involves raising salmon in containers placed under water near shore, began in Norway about 50 years ago and has since caught on in the U.S., Ireland, Canada, Chile and the United Kingdom. Due to the large decline in wild fish from overfishing, many experts see the farming of salmon and other fish as the future of the industry. On the flip side, many marine biologists and ocean advocates fear such a future, citing serious health and ecological implications with so-called “aquaculture.”

Ocean advocates would like to end fish farming and instead put resources into reviving wild fish populations. Pictured: a salmon farming operation in Chile.  PHOTO CREDIT: Sam Beebe, EcoTrust

George Mateljan, founder of Health Valley Foods, says that farmed fish are “far inferior” to their wild counterparts. “Despite being much fattier, farmed fish provide less usable beneficial omega 3 fats than wild fish,” he says. Indeed, U.S. Department of Agriculture research bears out that the fat content of farmed salmon is 30-35 percent by weight while wild salmons’ fat content is some 20 percent lower, though with a protein content about 20 percent higher. And farm-raised fish contain higher amounts of pro-inflammatory omega 6 fats instead of the preponderance of healthier omega 3s found in wild fish.

“Due to the feedlot conditions of aquafarming, farm-raised fish are doused with antibiotics and exposed to more concentrated pesticides than their wild kin,” reports Mateljan. He adds that farmed salmon are given a salmon-colored dye in their feed “without which their flesh would be an unappetizing grey color.”

Some aquaculture proponents claim that fish farming eases pressure on wild fish populations, but most ocean advocates disagree. To wit, one National Academy of Sciences study found that sea lice from fish farming operations killed up to 95 percent of juvenile wild salmon migrating past them. And two other studies—one in western Canada and the other in England—found that farmed salmon accumulate more cancer-causing PCBs and dioxins than wild salmon due to pesticides circulating in the ocean that get absorbed by the sardines, anchovies and other fish that are ground up as feed for the fish farms. A recent survey of U.S. grocery stores found that farmed salmon typically contains 16 times the PCBs found in wild salmon; other studies in Canada, Ireland and Great Britain reached similar conclusions.

Another problem with fish farms is the liberal use of drugs and antibiotics to control bacterial outbreaks and parasites. These primarily synthetic chemicals spread out into marine ecosystems just from drifting in the water column as well as from fish feces. In addition, millions of farmed fish escape fish farms every year around the world and mix into wild populations, spreading contaminants and disease accordingly.

Ocean advocates would like to end fish farming and instead put resources into reviving wild fish populations. But given the size of the industry, improving conditions would be a start. Noted Canadian environmentalist David Suzuki says that aquaculture operations could use fully enclosed systems that trap waste and do not allow farmed fish to escape into the wild ocean. As for what consumers can do, Suzuki recommends buying only wild-caught salmon and other fish. Whole Foods and other natural foods and high end grocers, as well as concerned restaurants, will stock wild salmon from Alaska and elsewhere.

CONTACTS: Health Valley Foods, www.healthvalley.com; USDA, www.usda.gov; David Suzuki Foundation, www.davidsuzuki.org.

EarthTalk® is brought to you by the Editors of E/The Environmental Magazine.

SEND YOUR ENVIRONMENTAL QUESTIONS TO: EarthTalk, P.O. Box 5098, Westport, CT 06881; earthtalk@emagazine.com. Read past columns at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalk/archives.php. EarthTalk is now a book! Details and order information at: www.emagazine.com/earthtalkbook.

First Post-Primary Polling Results Released

For those of you watching- here are the first post-primary polling results released by the Rasmussen Reports:

On August 11, Rasmussen Reports conducted a telephone survey of 500 likely voters, showing Malloy with 48 percent of the vote and Foley with 33 percent of the vote. Thirteen percent are undecided, and six percent prefer another candidate.

In Connecticut’s US Senate race, Richard Blumenthal leads Linda McMahon 47 percent to 40 percent. Seven percent remain undecided, while five percent prefer another candidate.

The margin of sampling error is +/-4.5 percentage points with a 95% level of confidence. Field work for all Rasmussen Reports surveys is conducted by Pulse Opinion Research, LLC.

With Primaries behind us, General Election campaigns are now in full swing!

CTLCV will be endorsing candidates for State House and Senate races who promise to make the environment a priority if elected or re-elected to the Connecticut General Assembly. We will announce the endorsements in early September.

Both Incumbents and challengers are seeking endorsement for their environmental positions. For a taste of what the incumbents have been up to in the last legislative session, check out our 2010 Environmental Scorecard at www.ctlcv.org/scorecard. The CTLCV scorecard grades lawmakers on their records voting for or against environmental bills. CTLCV has also posted short overviews of key environmental issues facing Connecticut in its 2010 Environmental Briefing Book at www.conservationeducation.org.

So how is your elected state legislator doing on the environment? As we consider endorsements, we welcome your input. Feel free to reply to lori.brown@ctlcv.org

CTLCV is Hiring

CTLCV has an opening for the CTLCV Education Fund Program Director. Details here and at www.conservationeducation.org.

DEP: Doing More with Less To Protect the Environment

The Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) came under attack this year for, allegedly, not getting permits out the door fast enough. Legislators and the governor promoted measures to speed up DEP permitting. Some legislative proposals essentially would have undone DEP. One proposal would have merged it into the Department of Commu­nity and Economic Development, for example.

Read more about Connecticut’s conservation politics in our 2010 Environmental Scorecard

However, DEP is a bit of an unsung hero. The agency’s  responsibilities keep expanding even as its staff and resources keep shrinking. Its traditional core programs—reducing pollution of water and air, managing waste, supporting outdoor recreation, and protecting natural resources—now include new initiatives, such as fighting invasive species, manag­ing electronic waste, responding to climate change, and handling federal stimulus projects. Yet, in the past two years alone, DEP lost some ten percent of its workforce along with some of its most knowledgeable and experienced leaders. Figuring out how to handle more responsibility with fewer resources is a necessity at DEP. And guess what? DEP is succeeding. The agency is doing its work faster and more efficiently.

“Many of the legislative battles fought this year directly involved the DEP’s role in enforcement of environmental laws. It is imperative that state lawmakers understand the long-term importance of an effective DEP that is appropriately staffed and funded. Our legislative champions must continue to speak up in support of the environmental work this agency does every single day to protect our air, land, water and health of citizens across the state.”

-Lori Brown, CTLCV Executive Director

Since 2008, the DEP has been systematically imple­menting a process to identify and minimize wasted time and effort across the agency’s permitting and enforcement processes and other programs. They call it LEAN—which doesn’t stand for anything other than, well … “lean.” It is an extension of the lean manu­facturing systems introduced in US and Japanese industries more than 20 years ago.

So far, DEP has completed 23 LEAN projects. The results are remarkable. Wherever LEAN is happen­ing, programs are accelerating, and with no erosion of environmental protections. Inspections are up. Backlogs are down. Permitting time has been cut drastically, too. The Office of Long Island Sound cut its average permitting time from 18 months to about 71 days. Wastewater-discharge permitting time is down from 30 months to about 140 days.

In the face of daunting responsibilities and less staff, DEP has opted to do more, not less. These are the folks who protect our air, water, and quality of life, and they deserve our thanks.

CTLCV Releases 2010 Environmental Scorecard

Legislators’ Grades Slip in Tough Budget Year

The scores are in.  And state legislators let their environmental grades slip in the 2010 legislative session, according to the 2010 Annual Environmental Scorecard released on August 5 by the bipartisan Connecticut League of Conservation Voters (CTLCV).  Citizens who want a sense of how their state legislators performed on environmental issues this year should take a look at their rankings.   

In the face of record-setting budget deficits, many legislators and business leaders seemed inclined to blame the economic downturn on the Department of Environmental Protection, in particular, and environmental regulations, in general.  In the first months of the session, the state's most important protections for air, water, and land appeared at risk of dissolution.

“This year was especially trying.  Lobbyists that have fought every year to weaken environmental laws and regulations for the benefit of a few industries found an opportunity for their false claims that protecting the environment was somehow an obstacle to Connecticut’s future,” said CTLCV’s Executive Director, Lori Brown.  “History has always shown the opposite.  A clean environment makes for a good economy.”

"Clean water, clean air, and protected open spaces are among the qualities that make Connecticut such a desirable place to live and work.  These precious environmental resources need to be protected, even during hard economic times, not needlessly squandered in short-sighted and harmful policy changes, said  Martha Phillips, CTLCV Co-Chair.

Scorecard Grades Lawmakers on their Environmental Voting Records

CTLCV grades all state senators and representatives on a 0% to 100% scale based on their votes on important environmental legislation.  The 2010 Environmental Scorecard grades legislators on their votes on nine major environmental bills, including bills on energy, recycling, green jobs, toxics, and environmental rollback.

Number of Legislators with Good Grades Drops by 15%

In 2009, 82% of the legislature earned A’s or B’s on their environmental voting records.  This year, however, the percentage of legislators scoring A’s or B’s dropped to 67%.  Fifty-one legislators scored a perfect 100% by casting pro-environment votes on each of the bills that CTLCV scored.  Another 33 legislators earned A’s on their environmental voting records.  CTLCV applauds those individuals for standing firm in their support for a clean, healthy environment.

In contrast, the number of legislators who scored C’s, D’s, or F’s increased this year, from a total of 33 (18%) in 2009 to a total of 61 (33%) in 2010.

Although the outlook for the environment was grim at the start of the 2010 legislative session, CTLCV worked with other environmental advocacy groups to stop or at least minimize anti-environment efforts.  In the end, the General Assembly adjourned without doing serious damage to environmental protection laws, and even extended them in some cases.

“We managed to thwart the worst of the rollbacks this year.  But I have no doubt the anti-environmental forces will be back in 2011.  That is why we should be very selective about who we elect this November.  The people we elect will be making those key policy decisions and we want them on our side,” said Brown.

Download the Full Scorecard at www.ctlcv.org/scorecard

For Senate scores, House scores, explanations of the environmental bills analyzed for the scorecard, a rundown on the 2010 legislative session and other analyses, please visit www.ctlcv.org/scorecard. 

- Posted by Kelly Kennedy, CTLCV Communications Director