Chuck.

That is all very interesting material there, much for us to concern our selves with.

Interesting also that some of the best trout fisheries l know of in the world are also those that human waste, after it has been through a treament plant is let loose.
Yes, in moderate quantities the water system is enriched and thus provides for the abundance of both vegetation and aquatic species.
In fact l well remember fishing a river in Ireland that ran beside a pig slaughter house. That ran a bloody mess into that river during the days they were killing porkers, but you should have seen the fish that were found there at that time. After the house closed down, it did not take long for the fishery to decline.
Same also for other, at one time great trout fisheries, same thing happened for the Bow river. The subsequent improvement of human effluent treatment changed that food base in that system.
I know of a few more also that are no longer the same.

Nature can deal with acceptable levels of waste, the process of natural biological breakdown can take care of that.
It is when levels are exceeded that the given volume of water cannot deal with and when toxins are introduced that kill off the bacterial process, that problems arise.

Either way. Farmers are entitled to make a living fron the land, my family were at one time big dairy, sheep and pig farmers. The did not in those days deal with the use of chemicals as they are now for the process of providing a food base for the live stock.
The numbers of animals kept were not in such numbers that the land could not deal with the natural breakdown of animal waste.
They did not keep 10,0000 turkeys in one house and so on.

To day they do have stringent control over what they can and cannot do so far as what they can put on the land and how they deal with animal waste.
But they also in the EU to day recieve goverment allowances for leaving land free of life stock and crops, and they also receive additional amounts over and above what they sell product for in the market place.
That takes care if you like, the deficit of production.

Interestingly also, fish hatcheries can also be responsible for pollutants in river systems. Fish waste, excess food etc have to go someplace, and that can also build to toxic levels if not dealt with.
Some of the famous UK chalk stream suffered at one time from that.

You would eventually see a problem on the Norfork river if there was no generation and sediment levels from the hatchery were allowed to build up.
Not to mention the build up of amonia and nitrates, etc.
That is why fish tanks contain filters so as a bacterial brekadown can take place of the contaminents. Arobic action.
Those of you that keep fish know you have to change water and filters at times.
No different from a body of water we call a river or a lake.
It has to have a natural means to deal with acceptable levels of contaminants, or something will go very wrong, which it has.


Fish farming of Salmon has created real serious problems in shore to the food base there, not only the fish and fauna of the oceans is gone in those zones, the knock on effect also to the bird populations that have no food base to feed the young is very evident.
Not to mention the investations of lice that now wild fish are becoming subjected too, and guss what they intorduce chemicals to kill the lice in the salmon cages and that further detroys teh natural wild food base. Nuts if you ask me, shut them down.

There are many places in the oceans that it is not safe to eat Oysters and other shellfish, becuase of contaminents.

I agree with Terry, that you cannot hold the farmers totally responsible. They were not to know in the past that the effects of what they do to day would cause the problems we are now aware of.
I accept that they may well do as of now. And it has to be with collaboration of both the farmers and means to provide if you like for the loss of income that they will likely endure if and when new regulations take place, which of course l agree with.

I can see both side of the story, and be realistic about it.

Davy.