Before I address the question on the therapeutants, I agree with you in terms of the ISA; all I'm saying is that...and I hope that isn't the case. I hope the testing that DFO does, and the testing the Canadian Food Inspection Agency does, is correct. Don't get me wrong on that. The problem is that history shows that these open net-pens eventually have problems. ISA is one of them, and there are many others as well. But I do hope that you are correct.
With respect to the use of therapeutants and disease in the farms, the only information I have is from two facilities. One is the Freshwater Institute in West Virginia, which has been operating for 20 years, and the other is the AquaSeed facility in Rochester, Washington State, which I believe members of the committee toured last year. That's also a 20-year operation. Neither of those facilities has had to use any disease control measures in their facilities in those 20 years. That is my understanding when I've asked them that same question.
They say that the key to keeping disease out of the farm is to never let it in. It's all about how you treat the water coming into the facility. We're going to use UV to treat water on its way into the facility. We'll be monitoring our wells to make sure we don't get pathogens in those wells. They're very adamant that with good, clean water coming into the facility, there shouldn't be a problem.
The disease can get in also via the smolts. Even though they're certified disease-free it doesn't necessarily mean that they are, because it's all spot sampling, as you know. We've built a quarantine facility, where they'll be held on a separate RAS system for four months. The fish husbandry people tell us that if there is disease in the smolts, we will see it within a four-month period. That's the reason we've designed the farm that way.
So in designing the facility, we've tried to draw from experience, from people who have been in this business for a long time. As you say, there are no guarantees on the face of the earth, but we think we've minimized the...to the extent that we can.
With respect to greenhouse gases, again, I'm not a scientist. I didn't do the math. Dr. Andy Wright, who I think addressed the committee last week, did the math. I don't really have a comment other than to say that what Andy has written appears to be reasonable. If there is degradation and rotting going on the bottom as a result of the waste from the farm sitting on the bottom and then rotting and you've got a big release of methane, there's probably a very large greenhouse gas footprint associated with the farms.
That's all I have to say on that subject.