Farmed and Dangerous?


Episode Description

People love to eat salmon, but chances are that salmon is not wild. Globally, over 70% of the salmon we eat is raised on fish farms in the open ocean. Does it matter? And is it true that salmon farms, which are supposed to take the pressure off wild salmon stocks, might be wiping them out? To find out, the Brothers immerse themselves in the worlds of both wild and farmed salmon in one of the most beautiful places on earth.

There has been a significant amount of discussion and debate around this episode. We feel the episode speaks for itself; here’s what others had to say:

BC Salmon Farmers Association Opinion Editorial

Join the discussion in the comments below, or on and

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

85 comments on “Farmed and Dangerous?

  1. We have changed the link to the rebuttal Mainstream Canada posted regarding this film. Anyone interested in learning what the Water Brothers omitted from their film, despite having access to the facts, can view them here.

    In response to the discussion here, if anyone has actual evidence to support their claims that fish waste is harmful, or that salmon farms actually pose any significant threat to wild salmon, or that I have lied and misrepresented the facts in any way, I would be more than happy to review and consider the evidence.

  2. sounds like the norway companys and possibly people are getting fat and rich while destroying our fish habitats

  3. It’s interesting to hear BC Salmon Farm industry representatives like grant and ian here continue with their strategies of misinformation and diversion. Some here might remember their initial facebook attempt called BC salmon farm facts, or something to that effect. (I know Ian’s dog does, remember that condescending blah you liked to use back then ian? Just an innocent farmer eh…that’s laughable.)

    Back then any discussion that brought to light facts that were considered dangerous to the industry or not in tune with their PR campaighn at the time, was deleted…remember the small forage feed fish grant, that was indeed funny…you certainly did lose it there. I expect the boses weren’t too happy with you guys botching those discussions so badly. So many points now, but at least the shoe is on the other foot now. You can’t delete these discussions. Your attempts to bully and gang up on those whose points weren’t appreciated don’t go over so well when it isn’t your site do they.

    What everyone has to keep in mind here is these people have an agenda. They are motivated by profit and profits go down with more stringent regulations and checks within the industry. These people are motivated by money, and they make decent money, at the expense of our resource.

    Nice to see you two still don’t bring enough wit to the table to sway the opinions of the masses. The PR campaign is failing, as is your business strategy. Time to suck it up and start putting your efforts into changing. Adapt or fail. On land you go!

    1. “What everyone has to keep in mind here is these people have an agenda. They are motivated by profit and profits go down with more stringent regulations and checks within the industry.”

      Are you sure about that Adam?

      We aren’t talking about the old paint factory on the river here…

      Just how do you propose “stringent regulations and checks” reduce profits?

      Like how ensuring our nets are maintained so we don’t lose fish – which we would then be unable to sell?

      Like regularly testing our fish for disease – so they live to be harvested and sold?

      Like monitoring the bottom under the pens – so we can make sure all that expensive feed we buy is used efficiently and not wasted?

      Like enforcing the 70-odd aquaculture specific regulations that manage farms – so in BC we can continue to operate to some of the highest standards in the world?

      Aquaculture seems to be the only industry out there where the use of green energy – solar and tidal – is frowned upon, somehow being seen as a negative thing.

      For all the critical energy spent attacking it, aquaculture looks to have some of the highest efficiencies and smallest footprints out there when comparing other methods of protein production.

      I guess when the reality of the situation doesn’t align with your views it is key to remove context and insert fear in order to gain support.

  4. I would ask the salmon farming industry this: why not take advantage of what seems to me to be a HUGE business opportunity: the first significant operation to grow salmon 100% on land (not just 1/3 of their life), and feed them 100% non-fish protein diet, will in my opinion be able to sell a superior, premium priced product!

    As a consumer, given a choice, which farmed fish would you choose: open ocean net pen raised or closed containment raised? I cannot believe that a huge segment of consumers would not be willing to pay a premium for that product. The marketing opportunities and business advantages are mind-boggling. “Protect wild salmon!”. “Conserve our wild feed fish stocks!”. “Eliminate disease transfer!” just to name a few marketing angles.

    From a business perspective, a need is not being met. That’s where creative businesses thrive.

    Why keep fighting the losing PR battle that surrounds your product? Why keep trying to change peoples minds? In the history of the world, trying to change peoples minds has proven to be a very poor strategy from a business perspective. Instead, why not get ahead of the game and capitalize on it?

    Oh, and to declare my bias, I am 100% for farmed salmon, but 100% against net pen farming. I just think there actually is a profitable way around the issue.