Awesome - "Must See" - Fishfarming Film!

[Little Hawk]

Please take a few minutes to watch this great work from Damien Gillis and the good folks at Watershed Watch.

Truly, this is all you need to know about the net-pen business.

http://www.watershed-watch.org/programs/aquaculture.html

[c.r.angler]

Oh look Sockeyefry, it's not just Alex. I guess you'll be busy trying to discredit all these biologists. Get busy, it might take you a while.....

[sockeyefry]

CR,

Haven't had a chance to yet, but I will. Although I am not expecting anything new or earth shattering. Just the same ole BS regurgitated by the Anti's

[Gunsmith]

Sockeye, you can call it bullsheet all you want but if I had my way even factory farming would get my kick in the pants, no one is better. They are just making a mess and under the pretense of feeding a hungry world. The only ones being fed are rich pockets.[8D]

http://i546.photobucket.com/albums/hh420/Gunsmith_r/IMG_1445.jpg

[sockeyefry]

Just as I thought, 16 minutes of the same BS. The film maker obviously went to the Micheal Moore school of misinformation and innuendo.

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers All,

I am a high school teacher with 4 university degrees, own and operate a fishing charter company as well as a company that does supervision for the courts.

In this day of increased environmental enlightenment and access to real and relevent biological information from most of the highest and brightest academic sources available, it is baffling that anyone could support fish farming in British Columbia. I understand that when the government does it is usually due to elected officials, with no training in the subject, simply bending to financial incentives.

However when the members of our society support fish farming I must question where their inducements come from for certainly there is nothing in the fish farming literature nor scientific reports that would lend support for any sane person in allowing fish farms in our beautiful British Columbia.

I would go one step further and suggest that when enough scientific and legal material is collected to demonstably prove in court that fish farms are negatively affecting our environment that this action should be done. The end result should be that fish farms - both collectively as well as individually - as well as elected government officials, who have failed in their duty to the people as well as the environment, should be held financially responsible for repair for that damage. As well there should be added such a punitive financial amount that anyone in the future would think twice about any possible damage to our environment.

And, before anyone questions my reasons for posting, I will explain. I am a fishing guide but I am foremost a teacher. I believe that we are here as stewarts of our environment and have a duty to the next generation. Simply put: We must pass to them our environment in as good or better shape than we received it. We have the technology but it appears we lack the will. This is simply not acceptable.

Most sincerely,

Fishing Guide
www.invictuscharters.com

[Brisco]

Why don't we hear more from the First Nation people?

[alley cat]

Ever notice they get hammered on this forum ?
Why would you get into a discussion with a large group that will bring up the race card in every argument ?
They are people like us with feelings and emotions , they for the greater part are as concerned as we are over the happenings in our waters ; but would you venture an opinion and identify yourself as first nations knowing someone will run the no rights / hate / anti FN card at you ?
I don't think so.

AL

[Brisco]

Whoa there Alleycat. There are the First Nations, commercial and sporties which are the three players in the salmon industry. I bring them up not because of race but as one of the parties involved. I would love to see all 3 parties join together to battle these evil fishfarms.

[Little Hawk]

Some FN Tribes are active amongst the opposition to the net-pen business. Trouble is, like us WASPS they too are fractured (mostly because of misinformation about the industry being spread around) and many succumb to bribery from industry and government and are actually operating salmon-farms.

I've tried on more than one occasion to contact various FN Chief's etc. and received no response. Can't blame em' I suppose; us Whitey's have worked long and hard at cultivating distrust between us...

Personally, I wish there were more FN folks on here like FA then we could rally more of the Tribes up and down the Coast to ramp-up the opposition to bring a hasty end to this tragic bull-sh!t.

Ever notice how when a particular Tribe here or there starts pounding the drums politicians' shake in their boots?

[sockeyefry]

Actually there are FN's which are active fish farmers, and others which have accepted fishfarming in their territioeies. there are a few vocal FN's like Bob Chamberlain which give the false impression that all FN's are against Fish farming.

Sorry Fishing Guide, there is a large amount of relevent scientific research which supports fish farming as does the simple fact that all the dire predictions of wild salmon extinction go unfufilled year after year. As part of your guide service do you allow sports to take fish for food or do you follow strict catch and release? Are you using your podium in the class romm to further spread the word of the "evil fish farms" to quote Brisco?

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers Sockeyefry,

Unfortunately I have found no creditable 'scientific research' that even begins to support fish farming. In fact the overwhelming evidence condemns the existence of fish farms and especially those in open nets. The information that advocates for the existence of fish farms is so biased and relies totally on the financing of fish farms that it is totally without merrit.

I am not quite sure what difference it makes if my clients retain or release their legally caught fish? The issue here is not whether or not a guide, or a sportsfisherman, catches fish but the existence of fish farms and the issues associated with them. However, since you asked, I was out today and my guests caught and retained one 20 lbs spring as well as 8 large dungeness.

As a teacher I do not 'spread the word of the evil fish farms' as that is neither my job nor what my students expect or require. What I do is provide the information from both scientific as well as biased sources and, through discussions and experiments, investigate the issues thoroughly. At the end of the exercise the students make his or her decisions based soley on the information they have considered.

You may be pleased to know that we have some amazing students in our educational system and they know how to evaluate information. Since they are our future we can rest knowing that, when they make the decisions, we will be in very capable hands. You may be distressed to know that I have yet to have one student side with the placement of fish farms - in their current form - on the British Columbia coast.

Fishing Guide

[alley cat]

Brisco :
I can see your breakdown of parties and do not disagree I only make the observation in this text that FN on here are viewed askance and with racial overtones by some members on this forum.
My point is this ........ why would you stick your head into a meat grinder if you only wanted to enjoy the pain !
The trouble with this way of communication is that we cannot indicate subtleties of delivery , and my intent was to make an observation but with overtones related to our past idiocies on this site.

AL

[Brisco]

quote:Originally posted by alley cat

Brisco :
I can see your breakdown of parties and do not disagree I only make the observation in this text that FN on here are viewed askance and with racial overtones by some members on this forum.
My point is this ........ why would you stick your head into a meat grinder if you only wanted to enjoy the pain !
The trouble with this way of communication is that we cannot indicate subtleties of delivery , and my intent was to make an observation but with overtones related to our past idiocies on this site.

AL

Alley Cat,

Point taken.And Fish farms are [}:)][}:)][}:)][}:)][}:)][}:)][}:)][}:)]

[alley cat]

Dulce periculum !

AL

[agentaqua]

Good discussions on First Nations started on this thread by Brisco.

I've been thinking that the reasons there are few (if any) First Nations who actively post on this forum for a number of reasons (please excuse the generalizing - we're talking about overall proportions, here):

1/ There still is a large gulf in interests and sustained communications between what we define as the so-called "white", and "modern" world (often more affluent, but not exclusively so), and those on reserve. There is some distrust of the outside world "off-reserve",
2/ Most First Nations are rarely ever defined as "sporties"; and most often fish with gill nets, dip nets, or traps. Most First Nations do not understand some of the "recreational interests" of the sportsfishing lobby, including catch and release,
3/ Many First Nations are largely insulated and isolated from so-called "mainstream" events; unless it is an urgency that affects their village and/or traditional lands. Some do not have ready access to the internet.

All of these reasons combined; means that First Nations participation on this forum is very sparse indeed.

However, when their way of life and/or traditional territories are threatened by industrial development such as open net-cage fish farms - they have been very organized and participatory in that opposition (something sockeyefry did not mention).

There have been mass protests by First Nations against fish farms at:

The Omega hatchery at Ocean Falls,
Quite number of sites and occasions along the Skeena River,
Twice there were delegations sent to Norway, one met with royalty,
Other demonstrations in and around Vancouver Island.
Demonstrations to various aquaculture committees.

They do care for wild salmon - like the sporties, commercial fishermen, and others.

[Brisco]

Wow, thanks for the info Agentaqua. Its the first I've heard of these protests by F.N. Lets get the 3 parties together and send these fish back to the Atlantic where nature put them in the first place.


Fish farms are [}:)]

[Little Hawk]

Indeed Brisco, that's what it'll take to move Government to oust this menace from our waterways, a well organized, well focused assault from all segments of society. 'Brother's in arms' as it were...

Agent;
Incidentally, the very first commercial attempt at fish-farming was initiated in 1971 by Crown Zellerback at Ocean Falls. Although it failed, I find it ironic that it was an American outfit that set it up in our water back then and now we have a Norwegian outfit doing it here to feed Americans'.

The ticket now, I believe, is to let each and every American know what is happening up here every time they buy farmed-salmon. No small feat, that's for sure.

We have to do something about it very soon because with the added pressure the salmon-farmers are inflicting on Pacific Salmon coupled with chronic-incompetence from the DFO and the Province, soon there will be no Pacific Salmon left and we'll have no choice but to grow them in cages.

'Golly - Sgt. Carter... could this be the real agenda?'

[sockeyefry]

Yes you figured it out LH, the real agenda. Boy sure can't put one over on you.

Fishing Guide,

If you haven's found any evidence which suppoprts fish farming than you either aren't looking very hard or you do not want to find anything which would upset your neat little opinion.

If you are so intent on saving the wild salmon why do you allow your sports to kill them?

The students are against fish farms because that is what you tell them to be. Shame on you for not allowing them to really make up their own minds. If you really want to teach them both sides than contact the BC salmon farmers assoc. for info.


Agent,

Yes you are right there are FN which oppose fish farming. I never said there wasn't however one of the delegations to Norway was positive towards fish farming.

[Little Hawk]

Yep, can't overlook the 1000 or so medial paying jobs the industry brings to the people of BC.

And yup, if and when FG decides to contact the SFABC they'll roll out a figure of several thousand BC jobs created by their environmentally-tragic escapades in our waters.

Even our own Provincial Government lies about industry employment stats in an effort to justify this carnage. I remember when then Minister Van Dongen trounced out a figure of 9 to 12,000 new jobs being created by the industry back when government lifted the moratorium on expansion of the industry.

Lies & deceit! Sickens me to no end...

[EmptiesInTheSwanson]

Sockeyefry you rock.

There is a ton of scientific papers supporting fish farming. If you are on Vancouver Island go to VIU to the fisheries and aquaculture department at the top of the campus and ask any faculty for some papers to read if its information you want.

p.s. the leading anti-FISH-farming (Alexandre Morton) scientist is a whale biologist who only took on studying the effects of fish farming because it was her husbands work when he died.Last I checked whales are mammals making me question her overly hyped attacks in the first place. Not to mention her large amount of support by the ever famous David Suzuki, whom I have name many a dump after

[gimp]

quote:Originally posted by EmptiesInTheSwanson

Sockeyefry you rock.


p.s. the leading anti-FISH-farming (Alexandre Morton) scientist is a whale biologist who only took on studying the effects of fish farming because it was her husbands work when he died.


WRONG sooo sorry your facts are way off

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll301/gimpsphoto/Picture002-1.jpg

[gimp]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/11/04/science/04prof.html

http://i291.photobucket.com/albums/ll301/gimpsphoto/Picture002-1.jpg

[EmptiesInTheSwanson]

Thanks for the article, almost completely supports me. She isnt even a scientist, just works with a couple

[sockeyefry]

Welcome Empties

It is so nice to have a friend here now that Barbender has left.

I am glad that some one else gets the BS around Morton and her cronies

[Little Hawk]

He'll surely be your only friend here out of thousands of members so you may as well milk-it while you can Sock!

My guess is: a) You recruited him/her/it. b) It is Barbender under a new alias

[sockeyefry]

Well Hawk, you can eliminate #1.

Actually besides a select few there hasn't really been many people posting for or against.

[agentaqua]

quote:Originally posted by EmptiesInTheSwanson

Thanks for the article, almost completely supports me. She [Morton} isnt even a scientist, just works with a couple

Yawwn there, empty from the neck up...

Same-old tiring regurgitation of corporate name-calling and shooting the messenger. Is this the best you can do? We already covered this at: http://www.sportfishingbc.com/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=8847

You're not Handee re-incarnated, are ya?

If Morton doesn’t have a PhD (only a lowly BSc), and is outpublishing the pro-industry hired guns and DFO – what does that say about their competence?

Ken Brooks is a geologist, not a fisheries scientist - yet he gets paid to defend your industry - yet I haven't hear you whining about he being qualified to defend anything regarding fish.

check-out Stephen Hume's Article below:

Science is a method; it does not insist on a credential
Stephen Hume. The Vancouver Sun. Vancouver, B.C.: Jun 25, 2008. pg. A.15
Copyright Southam Publications Inc. Jun 25, 2008

Any mention of Alexandra Morton, the feisty whistleblower who first drew unwelcome attention to sea lice and the interaction between farmed and wild salmon in the Broughton archipelago, routinely draws e-mail scoffing that she's not a "real" scientist because she doesn't have a PhD.

Science is not a credential. Science is a method. Science is practised every day by people who don't have PhDs. Indeed, people without academic credentials as we'd recognize them today laid the foundations for our entire edifice of scientific knowledge.

And some who hold PhDs are not practising science but use the credential to lend weight to opinions that they wish to advance in service of other agendas -- corporate objectives, government policy, propaganda supporting various causes, etc.

Science is a process by which we attempt an accurate representation of the world and how it works. Anybody is free to use the scientific method, it's not exclusive to the PhD club. If the results subsequently meet the rigorous criteria demanded by that method, then the findings are, by definition, a "scientific" result.

Scientific method is elegant and simple. It can be applied to any subject, hence "political science," "social science" and "life science" among the physical sciences.

Poets use scientific method to analyze the way verse works, its rhythms, metres, internal structures and its cultural and historical contexts, even whether a particular ancient Greek is more or less likely to be the author of an attributed fragment.

Choreographers use scientific method to determine the most efficient use of the available dance floor. Smart football coaches use it to calculate which offensive plays are most likely to succeed against which defensive formations.

Journalists use it all the time, sifting through heaps of apparently conflicting or unrelated information looking for pattern, incongruence, the consequences of cause and effect that might explain the outcomes of elections, international conflicts or the flow of commerce.

Scientific method demands not the prior approval of academic institutions, governments or corporations, but intelligence, curiosity, the ability to frame a question or design tests for a hypothesis, attention to detail, diligent gathering of evidence and then challenging the hypothesis and reporting honestly whether it stands up or collapses.

Nobody requires a PhD to do this. Nor does possession of a PhD guarantee that a conclusion is automatically superior to one arrived at by somebody with no degree at all. The value of the conclusion depends entirely upon the soundness of the method.

Certainly, the knowledge required to obtain a higher degree brings expectation of proficiency in framing hypotheses, analyzing data and evaluating results, yet the scientific literature is rife with examples of scholars with PhDs whose methods are subsequently found wanting by their peers. It's the method that's at issue, not academic reputation.

I don't draw these parallels to dismiss the value of credentials in higher learning. But it's important to recognize them for what they are and not to conflate them with what they are not. Owning a credential has nothing to do with application of method.

My intent is merely to point out that dismissing one person's analysis because that person doesn't happen to fall into a particular category -- not having a PhD, for example -- may satisfy the critic's desire to affirm preconceptions, but it's no basis for assuming that the work isn't perfectly good science.

Thus, anybody who seeks answers by proper use of scientific method qualifies as a scientist -- and that includes school kids who construct award-winning science fair projects.

Obtaining a PhD doesn't automatically make one a scientist. It means only that one has received a credential for achieving certain educational objectives that satisfy the standards of a particular institution. Seeking consistent answers to questions using scientific method is what makes scientists.

So e-mailing me to denounce Morton's -- or anyone else's -- research as not credible because she doesn't possess a PhD and therefore is not a "real" scientist may feel satisfying to the senders, but it is essentially worthless as criticism and is unworthy as personal comment.

Do the strict criteria of the scientific method govern the process by which the researcher achieves conclusions? That's the only issue.

shume@islandnet.com

Credit: Stephen Hume; Special to the Sun

[EmptiesInTheSwanson]

Well Agentaqua the reason she is out publishing is sensationalism and fear. Uneducated readers will obviously latch on to whatever is the scariest. If someone publishes a story that says "cucumbers will kill your children" and someone else publishes a story saying "cucumbers are fine and are a great compliment to your salad" I think we both know which is going to sell papers.

My problem is if there is a lack of well rounded knowledge anything will be blindly believed with religeous conviction making whomever is shouting from their soap box suddenly a brilliant saviour.

And No I am not Barbender. Just someone else who thinks for himself. I have fished sport, fished commercial and farmed salmon and shellfish. I spent a couple years in college studying aquaculture and realized much of the aggresion between pro-wild and pro-cultured advocates is nothing but one person pointing at the first thing in their way. The oceans are global and its rediculous to think the virus and the cure are all contained in our little ecosystem

[agentaqua]

quote:Originally posted by EmptiesInTheSwanson

Well Agentaqua the reason she is out publishing is sensationalism and fear. Uneducated readers will obviously latch on to whatever is the scariest.
The reason she gets her stuff published in peer-reviewed journals is because it is valid science - reviewed by many peers in the science community. It's that simple, empty.

The reason the "other guys" are fumbling is because they are trying to defend the industry against getting some of their impacts highlighted.

Read the peer-reviewed literature, starting with the link Cuttlefish posted at: http://rspb.royalsocietypublishing.org/content/early/2009/07/02/rspb.2009.0771.full.pdf

It's not a study by those evil DSF card-carrying anti's. It's by a well respected industry scientist, Mark Costello. In it he states (p.6): "The evidence that salmon farms are the most significant source of the epizootics of sea lice on juvenile wild salmonids in Europe and North America is now convincing".

Don't get brain-washed, capital M, capital T. Get ed-U-ma-cated, son.

[EmptiesInTheSwanson]

hahahahaha awesome

[EmptiesInTheSwanson]

quick question. Is it common to get personal on this forum the second someone says something you dont agree with? Conversation has nothing to do with us at all and probably has absolutely no bearing on the real world and people get their hackles up enough to be actually angry at somebody... hilarious. Honestly though let me know if this is the kind of place where you cant say whats on your mind without somebody attacking you personally rather than just attacking your point of view. I will simply not give my input/opinion on anything if it makes people cry.

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers All,

Before going further I must state that I don't harbour resentment towards anyone that hold viewpoints that differ from mine and I will not get personal. It is the message that offends me and, I am sure, that I hold viewpoints that others don't agree with too. In fact, the very nature of science requires perspective from both sides to ensure validity. However I respectfully ask that we look for solutions to problems and not degenerate into name calling and open hostilities. For this I thank you.

In response to sockeyefry's comment that I haven't looked very far for 'any evidence which supports fish farming' one must first define fish farming. I would suggest that there is amply evidence that fish farming not only 'could' be beneficial but, with the constant pressure on wild fish stocks, eventually will be necessary in order to supply protein to an ever expanding world population.

We raise chickens, cows, sheep and an almost endless variety of others - including fish - to sustain our human population. We do this in an effort to find protein that is safe and financially economical. I believe that we can raise fish in a safe fashion and that, eventually, we will be forced in that direction. What I do believe, and what the scientific information and evidence currently shows is that we are not there. Open nets are not safe and are only used as they are financially economical - to the benefit of a select few and at the significant expense of our wild fish populations and the environment itself.

Sockeyefry...I am intent on saving wild salmon and, upon that point, you have me entirely correct. I will save them because I enjoy fishing. I will save them because I enjoy summer salmon bbq's and wild salmon taste great. I will save them because many people pay me well to do something that I enjoy. I will save them because those people enjoy the experience - we call it recreation - and the smile while they are in the midst of a slab is truely priceless. I will save them because my students deserve a chance to learn how to fish and enjoy both the experience and the product. And, yes, I will save them because they are our canary in the coal mine and, as long as they exist I know that we have not totally screwed up the environment and, as such, there is hope. I will save them!

This past weekend saw two charters: one to Port Alberni for sockeye and one to Ucluelet for springs. On both trips we limited out. If I believed for one moment that my impact on this resource would place these wild salmon in jeopardy my boat would remain high and dry. While I have significant doubt as to the creditablility of DFO and their ability to protect our wild fish (remember they are the ones who gave open net pens the green light) I must believe that they have some faint idea of what they are doing and that their numbers indeed allow for my fishing opportunity and retention. My impact on the environment and upon wild stocks does not statistically show compared to the impact upon wild stocks through open net pens.

When you suggest that my students are against fish farms 'because that is what you tell them to be' you obviously did not carefully read my previous response or you are not a parent of a high school student. My students - and I would dare go out on a branch here and suggest most students - are against open net fish farms because of the science. To suggest that I could simply tell them what to believe and they would go with the flow is simply not reality. Our students are intelligent and one only has to stand at the back of a high school class for a few minutes to realize one important fact - they have working brains - and, for the most part, know how to use them. Not only do I not tell them - nor, for that matter, can you - but I actually tell them specifically that I won't do their work for them. This is their choice and they have to make up his or her own mind but...their final report MUST be supported fully with scientific evidence which provides for their mindset. I know you would be impressed if you took the time to see the process in action. It really works.

I thank you for your suggestion about the BC Salmon Farmers Association and the information that they may provide. However I ask quite sincerely: will this be accurate and scientific evidence obtained through scientific inquirey or will it be 'information' from a biased group wishing to place it's industry in the best light? I know I can 'claim' my charter company is the 'Best in the West' and that nobody equals my company. Ask me and I will (could) tell you. However a scientific exploration of that claim would show many other more qualified guides depending on your criteria (age, location, boat size, area fished, species targetted, etc....). In order for you to make up your mind upon a charter you would be advised to do some research to find out the 'real bottom line.'

Again...you and I differ in our perspective upon open net fish farming. My effort is to ensure - as soon as possible - that we remove open net farms from our ocean environment and place them on shore using as sophisticated technology as is currently available to filter the effluent in order to isolate our impact on the marine environmnet. When that occurs I think you may be surprised that public opinion may swing in your favour. In the meanwhile I will support efforts to save the wild salmon from the impacts of open net pens.

[Fishing Guide]

Cheers All,

Before going further I must state that I don't harbour resentment towards anyone that hold viewpoints that differ from mine and I will not get personal. It is the message that offends me and, I am sure, that I hold viewpoints that others don't agree with too. In fact, the very nature of science requires perspective from both sides to ensure validity. However I respectfully ask that we look for solutions to problems and not degenerate into name calling and open hostilities. For this I thank you.

In response to sockeyefry's comment that I haven't looked very far for 'any evidence which supports fish farming' one must first define fish farming. I would suggest that there is amply evidence that fish farming not only 'could' be beneficial but, with the constant pressure on wild fish stocks, eventually will be necessary in order to supply protein to an ever expanding world population.

We raise chickens, cows, sheep and an almost endless variety of others - including fish - to sustain our human population. We do this in an effort to find protein that is safe and financially economical. I believe that we can raise fish in a safe fashion and that, eventually, we will be forced in that direction. What I do believe, and what the scientific information and evidence currently shows is that we are not there. Open nets are not safe and are only used as they are financially economical - to the benefit of a select few and at the significant expense of our wild fish populations and the environment itself.

Sockeyefry...I am intent on saving wild salmon and, upon that point, you have me entirely correct. I will save them because I enjoy fishing. I will save them because I enjoy summer salmon bbq's and wild salmon taste great. I will save them because many people pay me well to do something that I enjoy. I will save them because those people enjoy the experience - we call it recreation - and the smile while they are in the midst of a slab is truely priceless. I will save them because my students deserve a chance to learn how to fish and enjoy both the experience and the product. And, yes, I will save them because they are our canary in the coal mine and, as long as they exist I know that we have not totally screwed up the environment and, as such, there is hope. I will save them!

This past weekend saw two charters: one to Port Alberni for sockeye and one to Ucluelet for springs. On both trips we limited out. If I believed for one moment that my impact on this resource would place these wild salmon in jeopardy my boat would remain high and dry. While I have significant doubt as to the creditablility of DFO and their ability to protect our wild fish (remember they are the ones who gave open net pens the green light) I must believe that they have some faint idea of what they are doing and that their numbers indeed allow for my fishing opportunity and retention. My impact on the environment and upon wild stocks does not statistically show compared to the impact upon wild stocks through open net pens.

When you suggest that my students are against fish farms 'because that is what you tell them to be' you obviously did not carefully read my previous response or you are not a parent of a high school student. My students - and I would dare go out on a branch here and suggest most students - are against open net fish farms because of the science. To suggest that I could simply tell them what to believe and they would go with the flow is simply not reality. Our students are intelligent and one only has to stand at the back of a high school class for a few minutes to realize one important fact - they have working brains - and, for the most part, know how to use them. Not only do I not tell them - nor, for that matter, can you - but I actually tell them specifically that I won't do their work for them. This is their choice and they have to make up his or her own mind but...their final report MUST be supported fully with scientific evidence which provides for their mindset. I know you would be impressed if you took the time to see the process in action. It really works.

I thank you for your suggestion about the BC Salmon Farmers Association and the information that they may provide. However I ask quite sincerely: will this be accurate and scientific evidence obtained through scientific inquirey or will it be 'information' from a biased group wishing to place it's industry in the best light? I know I can 'claim' my charter company is the 'Best in the West' and that nobody equals my company. Ask me and I will (could) tell you. However a scientific exploration of that claim would show many other more qualified guides depending on your criteria (age, location, boat size, area fished, species targetted, etc....). In order for you to make up your mind upon a charter you would be advised to do some research to find out the 'real bottom line.'

Again...you and I differ in our perspective upon open net fish farming. My effort is to ensure - as soon as possible - that we remove open net farms from our ocean environment and place them on shore using as sophisticated technology as is currently available to filter the effluent in order to isolate our impact on the marine environmnet. When that occurs I think you may be surprised that public opinion may swing in your favour. In the meanwhile I will support efforts to save the wild salmon from the impacts of open net pens.

[sockeyefry]

Hey FG,

If you couldn't find any evidence then you did not look very hard.

How do you protect a species from extinction by eating them?

Find me the statistics which indicate that a fish farm harms thwe wild salmon. Not an opinion piece of what could happen, but actually proof of an effect which has occurred in BC. Good luck cause there isn't any.

Your students are wet behind the ears Kids who can be told to believe anything. They would gleefully line up to sign a petition banning DiHydrogen Monoxide. (This was acrtually done by Penn and Teller on the TV show "B*llsh*t". Theyc ionvimced a bunch of college age kids to sign such a petition by telling them as whole bunch of half truths. Do you know what DHM is?


It's Water Good ole H2O.

The BCSFA info will be no less biased than the info you get from Morton, the GSA and CAAR. It's just the other side of the story. Thought you might like some enlightnement.

Once the technolgy is developed, the farms will be on shore. All salmon farming companies are actively involved or have been involved in this type of research. I really do hope we can develop such technology, but to date it has not been so. It really would make farming so much easier.

Yes Empties, unfortunately that's what happens here. You just have to ignore it and drive on. Little Hawk and Chris 73 are the worst for it. Agent hasn't to my knowledge, although he can be a little condescending.

Agent,

Costello's paper is nothing more than a literature review with his opinion of what he has read. Hardly something which would be considered hard evidence. Same stuff as Brian Harvey, which you ripped Agent.

[Little Hawk]

Sockeye;

How soon you forget just who it was that referred to the opposition to the environmental-rape you so heartily defend -as sheep!

This is but one example where you, too, have allowed that 'little-schoolboy' in all of us to rise to the surface. Do yourself a favor and throw your sinking-presence here a lifeline - look in a mirror once in a while.


Truth of it is, my attitude, and likely that of Chris's and others, is simply a product of intense frustration with our own collusive government for being in bed with this industry - when they know damn well it's wrong!

Evidence is IN! Time to get the fish-farmers OUT!

What I need to do is work on controlling my anger and let common-sense and Nature take its course, after all if you, Sockeye, are the best sentry the industry has to lurk here and disseminate lies among the sport-fishing community, few if any of the big-holes in this sinking boat will be plugged...

[tubber]

I find this thread fascinating, having read 98% of it and appreciate the contributions of all in keeping the debate going.

quote:Your students are wet behind the ears Kids who can be told to believe anything
One question for you SF- How old were you when your indoctrination into your belief system regarding farmed salmon began? My guesses would be your family is involved or a very influential older role model with a financial stake in the business won you over very early. Or you just spin for a living and could just as easily join Little Hawk's camp for the right price.

[vetteman]

quote:Originally posted by sockeyefry

Actually there are FN's which are active fish farmers, and others which have accepted fishfarming in their territioeies. there are a few vocal FN's like Bob Chamberlain which give the false impression that all FN's are against Fish farming.

Sorry Fishing Guide, there is a large amount of relevent scientific research which supports fish farming as does the simple fact that all the dire predictions of wild salmon extinction go unfufilled year after year. As part of your guide service do you allow sports to take fish for food or do you follow strict catch and release? Are you using your podium in the class romm to further spread the word of the "evil fish farms" to quote Brisco?




I would have to agree that not all F/N people are against fish farming.I did,however,have the privilege of listening to Shawn Atleo speak in Fernie last April and he had serious concerns about the fish farms in his traditional territory(Marktosis/Ahousaht)I'm sure we all know who Chief Atleo is and what he's become in the last couple of days.Given his concerns and his new position as Grand Chief,I'd say that the Open Pen fish farmers should be a little bit concerned about the future of their business in his territory at least.
I oppose Open Pen fish farms and I really don't care who knows it or if they agree with me.Everyone is entitled to their opinion and that's mine.
Dave

[Peahead]

quote:Originally posted by tubber

I find this thread fascinating, having read 98% of it and appreciate the contributions of all in keeping the debate going.

quote:Your students are wet behind the ears Kids who can be told to believe anything
One question for you SF- How old were you when your indoctrination into your belief system regarding farmed salmon began? My guesses would be your family is involved or a very influential older role model with a financial stake in the business won you over very early. Or you just spin for a living and could just as easily join Little Hawk's camp for the right price.

[Peahead]

[/quote]

quote:Originally posted by tubber

I find this thread fascinating, having read 98% of it and appreciate the contributions of all in keeping the debate going.

quote:Your students are wet behind the ears Kids who can be told to believe anything
One question for you SF- How old were you when your indoctrination into your belief system regarding farmed salmon began? My guesses would be your family is involved or a very influential older role model with a financial stake in the business won you over very early. Or you just spin for a living and could just as easily join Little Hawk's camp for the right price.



Well put tubber.
....I guess it is not surprising though that the bulk of those in favour of fish farming (the way it presently exists) will most likely have a some sort of stake or intrest in the industry. Those that do, will stand to lose alot of $ if the industry is made to jump through many hoops to exist. Being more heavily regulated and/or moved to land base will cost money. I don't care if it cost the industry tons of money to satisfy all scientific concerns. Like all business, it cost money to do business safely, sustainably and legally. What upsets me is that the government is in bed with this industry because it makes big money. Its no wonder government and the industry are turning their backs on the suggestions that this industry harms/kills our fish. Its alsmost as if Government/DFO would rather just let the wild fish die off, cut off funding to hatcheries and then there would be no argument.
The wild fish belong to all of us. How dare government allow this industry to take them away from us and our children, especially when there is a way for both to exist without the harm.

[sockeyefry]

Peahead,

You obviously have no idea what costs are already heaped upon the farm industry, or what level of scrutiny exists. You simply live in your dream world where there is anarchy on the oceans and farms do whatever they want, crushing and stomping out wild salmon at every chance.

Reasonable costs of doing business yes, but irrational emotional arguments from whale biologists do not constitute the basis for reasonable costs. She wants the farmns out of the water necause she is being paid to do just that, ansd the rest of you sheep are falling for it.

[Peahead]

I know you are scared Sockeyefry .....it must be intimidating to have all of us out here. But to make you feel better I do beleive that eventually we will be looking at farms that we can all agree on......but then again that could be me slipping back int my "dream world" again ;)

[Peahead]

BTw one more thing I must say is that I am very impressed with Fishing Guide's posts and the respectful way in which he writes. Your posts make sense, are fair and not directed personally in any negative way. A breath of fresh air my friend. Keep up the good work. I also happen to agree with you but if I didn't i would still have respect for you and what you say.

[EmptiesInTheSwanson]

I have to agree Peahead. Contained pens (if thats what you are refering to) would eliminate a lot of head aches we all endure debating back and forth on the rights and wrongs in Aquaculture. Its good for both sides as water treatment before and after use in the farm is possible, it eliminates the effects of predation and algae blooms, it separates cultured from wild completely, among other things.

The problem I see is that any contained system is expensive as hell and since farmed salmon is demonized at every turn there isnt enough profit for farmers to easily convert. If there is a mandatory change than any local small time farms will be wiped out leaving only the big companies and than everyone suffers mutually. In which case everyone may support Sockeyes willingness to say how he feels regardless of the obvious oppositions.