Talk:Aquaculture of salmonids

Fisheries and Fishing B‑class High‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Fisheries and Fishing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of fisheries, aquaculture and fishing on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Fisheries and FishingWikipedia:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingTemplate:WikiProject Fisheries and FishingFishing articles
B	This article has been rated as B-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
High	This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.

A fact from Aquaculture of salmonids appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 16 May 2009 (check views). A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2009/May.

Wikipedia

Pollution and toxins

I have concerns about section 3.2

"Salmon farms are typically sited in pristine marine ecosystems which they then pollute. A farm with 200,000 salmon discharges more faecal waste than a city of 60,000 people. This waste is discharged directly into the surrounding aquatic environment, untreated, often containing antibiotics and pesticides."

The first sentence is a subjective statement without supporting citations.

It unsupported because is isn't true. 200,000 salmon at various ages would be fed 2 to 4,000 kg of feed per day (depending upon the size distribution and temperature) and 60,000 people would be on a starvation diet at < 100 gm/day or about 500 kcal. Deweaver (talk) 21:30, 14 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

In the second sentence, how was this calculated? It cites a factsheet from the Seafood Choice Alliance which gave no details on where they got this info or how it was calculated? Using the term fecal waste and then directly comparing it to human waste without context is misleading. Salmonids do not produce fecal coliform bacteria (Spanggaard et al. 2000) as do mammals and birds. In this respect salmonid faeces does not pose the same health or environmental risks. Comparison to terrestrial loading (e.g. cities, farms) on the basis of individual nutrients such as nitrogen is a more objective approach. This is addressed in documents produced from the World Wildlife Fund's Salmon Aquaculture Dialogue which is referred to further in the article. --ReidGK (talk) 01:27, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good to see you about again. That was a good job you did on Integrated Multi-Trophic Aquaculture. The first sentence, above, was indeed a subjective statement, which I entered based on my observation of salmon farming applications in New Zealand. If in your experience, the statement is atypical, please feel free to just delete it. That's a good point on fecal coliform bacteria, and yes, the source is shaky. Do not hesitate to make changes to the article you think are appropriate. --Epipelagic (talk) 02:16, 11 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Labeling requirements

I just bought some farmed salmon from canada with the phrase "Fresh atlantic salmon FLT color" on the label. What does that mean? Are there requirements in the US or canada regarding this? 68.115.35.110 (talk) 22:32, 23 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]