What can WE do to help save the salmon?

[lorneparker1]

I'll not get into the accuracy of your characterization of the situation; such discussions on this forum invariably lose their track and turn into slanging matches that serve no other constructive purpose than allowing tribalistic shallow thinkers to vent their very venomous spleens. I will suggest that it seems to me to be a very incongruous action to first force the issue in the courts and transfer responsibility for salmon farms to the DFO and then complain bitterly about how the DFO is managing the farms and suggest that only the provincial government can save the salmon.

When farming was provincially controlled, the regulatory authority was local and much more susceptible to local political pressure from voters. Now that it is federal, it is nearly immune from that pressure because it is distant and influenced to a considerably larger degree by voters who are not at all connected to the issue and who have no stake in it than it is by those who are residents in the province and have a substantial stake in the outcome. The battle to eliminate sea farms will never be won based on science simply because the science is not conclusive in spite of the claims to the contrary. While the populist campaign may attract a few supporters, they have no effect on the validity of the science and I suspect serve to irritate the situation more than resolve it. The only way to win it is through political pressure and the Harper government's recent actions are a clear illustration how effective at the federal level that is.

In my view, it was a strategic error of the first magnitude to force the issue if the antis wanted to have a chance at succeeding. I've been very curious why the decision was taken. Ms. Morton was kind enough to explain and satisfy my curiosity (assuming I understand correctly what she has responded with). While I view it as such, I have no intention of arguing about it or heaping criticism on her for doing so; it was her choice to make as are the consequences of that choice.

 

[Foxsea]

Not claiming allegiance means people have to at least think about my posts even if its only to decide which side of the issue I'm on.
.

Okay - I've been thinking about your posts. So I don't have to go to sleep pondering this confusion, rather than fleecy creatures - are you absolon, the Chaucer fan or are you Absolom, that recently posted about Marine Harvest and the WWF?

 

[absolon]

It is an impressive vocabulary you have...

(the part I made bold): What do you need to see? Science can be interpreted many ways....

It's not what I need to see. I don't have the authority to permit or prohibit the farms.

Conclusive science that doesn't require interpretation, that clearly demonstrates a causal link and for which it can be established that good scientific procedure in obtaining that science was followed would go a long way towards convincing the appropriate authorities that the farms are causing harm. Inflammatory rhetoric, unsubstantiated accusations, ad hoc PR campaigns, nuisance legal challenges, and the almost religious certainty that everyone else has it completely wrong and the antis have it completely right even in the absence of those three critical factors I mentioned aren't going to convince anyone of anything. Calling everyone and anyone who disagree with them liars and corrupt and in the pay of the farms isn't a successful technique to get people to take you seriously.

The anti farm movement has reached a point where it has a very large credibility gap. There have been so many instances of frantic declarations that the sky is falling because of the farms that haven't actually resulted in the sky falling, so many attacks on the integrity, professionalism and intelligence of the scientists and regulators who are actually doing the work on this and the farmers who are trying their best to keep their stocks and the environment they live in healthy and such an unwillingness to even consider other factors that clearly have a negative effect on the wild stocks that I think many, including the regulators, just tune it out. The approach has really had a negative effect on the debate by attempting to substitute emotional argument for rational discussion and it has created a poisoned atmosphere where constructive collaboration isn't possible anymore.

How do we get beyond that?...... I don't know but I suggest that the antis need to sit down, think through what they are trying to accomplish and work out a pragmatic strategy to do that. What they are doing now isn't working.

 

[absolon]

That is funny on several levels.

 

[absolon]

Okay - I've been thinking about your posts. So I don't have to go to sleep pondering this confusion, rather than fleecy creatures - are you absolon, the Chaucer fan or are you Absolom, that recently posted about Marine Harvest and the WWF?

Look left, look way left.

 

[Foxsea]

Sweet..... absolon signed up. A guy isn't smart enough to change user names

Forget holmes* and the troll spay.... Look for a shovel, there's a lot of chit about to be dumped. If he sticks around....

Did you ever have that right! Can the Moderator delete the last 3 pages of abs-**** so we can get back on topic? That guy really stunk up the place. He couldn't dazzle with brilliance so he was trying to baffle with abs-****. He never did douche the sand out. I'll leave him a bowl of milk on his way out...

 

[absolon]

You guys are doing a great job of proving my point about the current irrelevance of the antis.

Lots of loud grunting, chest beating, mock charges and displaying of teeth. Juvenile baboons go through the same sort of rituals when they are establishing the dominance hierarchy in the troop.

By the way foxsea, how does a guy with less than two months at the forum under his belt get the job of bouncer. Your dad own the place?

 

[Admin]

Ladies and Gentlemen.

I remind you that the expectation on this forum is for everyone to treat each other with respect. There will be zero tolerance for any member posting statements that are slanderous, using foul language, inappropriate content, or name calling. This topic is one of the most debated and divisive in British Columbia so let's not ruin that debate with mud slinging. We will not pull the plug on this thread but we will ban users who do not follow proper decorum.

Brian

 

[Mighty Sylvan]

Absolon, you are welcome on this thread to discuss "what we can do to save the salmon" but it seems you are only interested in provoking and sidetracking. Please, provide us with your insight of what we could do as recreational sport fisherman to preserve wild salmon.

 

[reelfast]

actually absolom raises several good points, points that need to be dealt with and considered as you move forward. towhit, JQ public likes things in absolutes, black and white, good and evil. science, all of science, only deals with probabilities. the medical care you recieve, the drugs you take are all available as a result of science and probability. this is a very tough concept to get across to the unwashed. for example, how many of you are climate change deniers? the science is overwhelming that this is for real but the probability still gets in the way and that crack under the door is exactly how big gas and oil launched the attack. you will find the same thing, in fact you have already confronted this, with the billion dollar net pen industry, a crack under that science door of probability and the attack that ISVa does not exist, the collapse of the fraser sockeye was due to something unrelated.

now couple that with your conservative government. the two objectives of all conservative governments are protecting the wealthy and making it easy for big business to do what they want when they want to. you canadians have already taken the step to put this in place, the citizens of the US are a step away from making this same dramatic and disastrous mistake. campaigning for smaller government brings lots of head nodding but citizens really like to have police, fire departments that respond in minutes, medicare and medicaid.....so the campaigning often times, not always, meets reality.

your government is taking your social structure apart and greasing the skids for big money. and your cannon of choice is probability. you should be thanking absolom for pointing this out because you are wasting a lot of energy thinking that you can win this fight with science as your partner, it's not going to happen, today, tomorrow or perhaps ever.

now i wish i had a magic pill for shifting gears and looking forward, but i dont'. hopefully someone here can think this through given your background, given your way of thinking and given what you have to lose.

 

[lorneparker1]

Well here are my thoughts. I think science is important to get the general public on board. The truth is the more people that know, the more people will get up and hopefully do something. I base what i decide to support based on good ole fashion common sense.

It does not take a degree in biology, to understand that if you bring a non native species in to the same habitat of native species that it usually is not good for those native species. I can give 100's of examples of that.

Common sense also says, that if you put that same species in mass quanities in a confined area that diseases are going to happen.
Common sense also says that any species is most susceptible to diseases when they are young.

This isnt rocket science. This is common sense. Other then jobs there is ZERO good fish farms in our waters are doing. ZERO. I am not anti-fish farm or anti-jobs. I believe we NEED aquaculture to also help sustain our wild fish. As if they dont exist, the consumer supply and demand and the governments "f%@#(*!% the resources, lets fatten our wallets mentality" would be the end of the wild fish through over harvesting if they didnt exist. Put the things on land, and im good.

 

[GLG]

Absolon how do you explain this?
Twenty nine Atlantic salmon were purchased from supermarkets in Vancouver on February 4, 5 of 2012.
Five tested positive for ISAv
http://deptwildsalmon.files.wordpre...cr-positive-results-updated-april-04-2012.pdf

As you can see your industry has a problem and putting your fingers in your ears and repeating "we are good" is not cutting it in the publics eye. This problem is affecting our wild salmon and to put money ahead of the environment is the wrong call by your sector. Why can't you clean up your act and get with the program. Closed Containment or shutting it down is the way forward.
GLG

 

[reelfast]

Why can't you clean up your act and get with the program. Closed Containment or shutting it down is the way forward.
GLG

MONEY! billions of dollars is the simple reason. until disease kills all of the net pen fishes, not much is going to change.

stripping the boreal forests of Alberta is just another example of money dictating our future. those forests are gone forever, they will NEVER come back, and that is a very long time. here again money, billions of dollars, are driving this attack on our one and only environment.

 

[lorneparker1]

Ladies and Gentlemen.

I remind you that the expectation on this forum is for everyone to treat each other with respect. There will be zero tolerance for any member posting statements that are slanderous, using foul language, inappropriate content, or name calling. This topic is one of the most debated and divisive in British Columbia so let's not ruin that debate with mud slinging. We will not pull the plug on this thread but we will ban users who do not follow proper decorum.

Brian

How come you only show up in threads i am a part of ? jhahaha

 

[absolon]

Absolon, you are welcome on this thread to discuss "what we can do to save the salmon" but it seems you are only interested in provoking and sidetracking. Please, provide us with your insight of what we could do as recreational sport fisherman to preserve wild salmon.

Sylvan, I haven't sidetracked the discussion. I merely took advantage of a rare opportunity to pose a simple question to Ms. Morton directly, one she has answered. The rest of my participation has been either responses to those who took affront to my doing so, most of whom chose to do so with personal comments, or explanations of the reasons for doing so to those who have taken an adult approach and asked questions instead of throwing insults. I'm not forcing the discussion to remain on this particular topic.

As far as what sports fishermen can do to assist the salmon, I would suggest that there are a multitude of areas that would contribute including spawning habitat restoration, prevention of further habitat and environmental degradation, improvement of watershed management, reduction of both commercial and sport harvest, eliminating hatchery constriction of the genetic library by returning to a model based on natural selection and reproduction and reducing the pollution in rivers and oceans. There are a multitude of factors that we know with certainty affect the survival and every one of them needs to be addressed. Inevitably, the driving force behind every one of the destructive factors is money and someone's attempt to get more of it. Fishermen should be active in combating every attempt to push development or increase harvest that will impact on the environment and conditions that are necessary for the survival of the fish. Fishermen also need to push for remediation of all of those things that have been damaged so that conditions for success are improved and for more research into the open ocean "black box" that appears to be swallowing our fish.

The concentration of the focus on salmon farms does a great disservice to all those other things that urgently need attention and is by far the largest negative impact of the anti-farm lobby.

 

[lorneparker1]

Sylvan, I haven't sidetracked the discussion. I merely took advantage of a rare opportunity to pose a simple question to Ms. Morton directly, one she has answered. The rest of my participation has been either responses to those who took affront to my doing so, most of whom chose to do so with personal comments, or explanations of the reasons for doing so to those who have taken an adult approach and asked questions instead of throwing insults. I'm not forcing the discussion to remain on this particular topic.

As far as what sports fishermen can do to assist the salmon, I would suggest that there are a multitude of areas that would contribute including spawning habitat restoration, prevention of further habitat and environmental degradation, improvement of watershed management, reduction of both commercial and sport harvest, eliminating hatchery constriction of the genetic library by returning to a model based on natural selection and reproduction and reducing the pollution in rivers and oceans. There are a multitude of factors that we know with certainty affect the survival and every one of them needs to be addressed. Inevitably, the driving force behind every one of the destructive factors is money and someone's attempt to get more of it. Fishermen should be active in combating every attempt to push development or increase harvest that will impact on the environment and conditions that are necessary for the survival of the fish. Fishermen also need to push for remediation of all of those things that have been damaged so that conditions for success are improved and for more research into the open ocean "black box" that appears to be swallowing our fish.

The concentration of the focus on salmon farms does a great disservice to all those other things that urgently need attention and is by far the largest negative impact of the anti-farm lobby.

I agree with most of what you said. However, no matter how good the habitat is, or how many fish the hatcheries pump out, if those fish leave the rivers and swim past a farm there is a chance they may not make it. They arent meant to be there, and shouldnt be there because there are other ways to have your cake and eat it too with aquaculture. How do you feel about the current logging practices? Have you been around the salmon and nimpkish rivers lately up island? How do we stop that from happening? Again i am not basing my opinion on the current logging practices up there on any type of science. BUT, common sense tells me with the about of erosion and log jams going on in those rivers right now, it cant be good for salmon (or steelhead for that matter).

I think we need to do EVERYTHING we can fit in our schedules, and IMO fish farms in our ocean are a part of that.

Lorne

 

[absolon]

Absolon how do you explain this?
Twenty nine Atlantic salmon were purchased from supermarkets in Vancouver on February 4, 5 of 2012.
Five tested positive for ISAv
http://deptwildsalmon.files.wordpre...cr-positive-results-updated-april-04-2012.pdf

As you can see your industry has a problem and putting your fingers in your ears and repeating "we are good" is not cutting it in the publics eye. This problem is affecting our wild salmon and to put money ahead of the environment is the wrong call by your sector. Why can't you clean up your act and get with the program. Closed Containment or shutting it down is the way forward.
GLG

Let me get this straight one last time. It is not my industry: I build cabinets, doors and furniture and have been doing that for nearly 20 years.

Let me also remind you that I have specifically stated that I am not going to get involved in any discussions of specific evidence because of the inevitable resulting degeneration of the discussion into pissing contests that will really divert the subject of this thread, something that I have already been accused of numerous times. What I will say in response is that Dr. Miller, in her testimony at the Cohen hearings, suggested that it was very likely that ISAv has been present in our waters since before the first importation of Atlantic Salmon eggs. Beyond that, I'm not going to argue the case.

 

[absolon]

I agree with most of what you said. However, no matter how good the habitat is, or how many fish the hatcheries pump out, if those fish leave the rivers and swim past a farm there is a chance they may not make it. They arent meant to be there, and shouldnt be there because there are other ways to have your cake and eat it too with aquaculture. How do you feel about the current logging practices? Have you been around the salmon and nimpkish rivers lately up island? How do we stop that from happening? Again i am not basing my opinion on the current logging practices up there on any type of science. BUT, common sense tells me with the about of erosion and log jams going on in those rivers right now, it cant be good for salmon.

I think we need to do EVERYTHING we can fit in our schedules, and IMO fish farms in our ocean are a part of that.

Lorne

The first step to addressing those issues is to address them instead of focusing exclusively on farms as the problem. Greenpeace was quite successful with getting a change in logging practices by developing a realistic strategy and implementing it. The focus has since shifted away from forestry practices and the issues are again starting to appear because the focus has been shifted away. Farms may be part of the problem, but until the anti-farm lobby has earned a seat at the table by acting responsibly and collaboratively with the farm industry and the regulators, by listening as well as lecturing, they aren't going to have influence or input. I'll repeat it again. The lobby needs to rethink their strategy; the current one has little benefit and large costs to the fish.

 

[GLG]

What I will say in response is that Dr. Miller, in her testimony at the Cohen hearings, suggested that it was very likely that ISAv has been present in our waters since before the first importation of Atlantic Salmon eggs. Beyond that, I'm not going to argue the case.

Good call to not argue the case because what you presented does not argue the case. Dr. Miller did not test Atlantic Salmon. These Atlantic Salmon that were tested were BC Farm Fresh and they came up ISAv positive. I guess your defence of this industry is to not defend the facts but to point in another direction.

I build cabinets, doors and furniture and have been doing that for nearly 20 years.

perhaps you should not be posting on the subject and stick to your area of expertise.

 

[absolon]

Now that I've laid out some of my background, how about you lay out yours and show me why you are qualified to post on the subject.