THESE ARE MARINE HARVEST’S OWN WORDS. Re: Fish Farms
- Thread starter John Ingram
- Start date
Stephen Kowalski
Active Member
Someone poke my eyes out. Please tell me what facts you have that people are "worse off today" then any time on the planet. This is easy - THERE ARE NONE- this is not an opinion. Period. So, let's go back to the good old days when people in China were starving, people in India were starving... Yep sounds much better. Please - the millions today are half what they were 30 years ago... Come on, this isn't even disputed! Let's go back to the days of Polio, Tuberculosis, ... really. Tell us how vaccinations are bad.... good grief.
cuttlefish
Well-Known Member
True that for people if all you look at is life expectancy. Not so true that for many other species we share this planet with;
https://www.ipbes.net/sites/default/files/downloads/spm_unedited_advance_for_posting_htn.pdf
Fish Camp
Well-Known Member
Fisherfolk ,firefolk ,garbagefolk ,the best one is getting pulled over for speeding by a policefolk...er.Or those fisherfolk...er's are ruining my reelection plans.Come on! We are all Fisherfolks here, just like the Firefolk and policefolk and garbagefolk...this according to Liberal speak.
Whole in the Water
Well-Known Member
No need to poke your eyes out, how about being open to understand the difference between an opinion and fact. Being passionate about an opinion doesn't it change it into fact that then no one can ever disagree with or prove otherwise with other facts.
Lets be clear I never said people are worse off today, however you did say that people are better off today then ever before. That by definition (see below) is an opinion, not a fact. Why? Because other information and facts can be presented to prove otherwise depending on one's point of view or opinion. My point is that there are still many serious problems in the world that humans need to deal with (many of them increasing with severity over time, especially with increasing human population growth) and minimizing taking action on them based upon an opinion that we are better off now than ever before is not a good course of action in my opinion.
If you wish to continue this dialogue which is quickly becoming trifling, please just PM me so we do not annoy the rest on the forum with discussion re. a differences of opinion.
From Merriam Webster's Dictionary
opinion
noun opin·ion|\ə-ˈpin-yən\
Definition of opinion
1a: a view, judgment, or appraisal formed in the mind about a particular matter We asked them for their opinions about the new stadium.
b: APPROVAL,ESTEEM I have no great opinion of his work.
2a: belief stronger than impression and less strong than positive knowledge a person of rigid opinions
b: a generally held view news programs that shape public opinion
3a: a formal expression of judgment or advice by an expert My doctor says that I need an operation, but I'm going to get a second opinion.
b: the formal expression (as by a judge, court, or referee) of the legal reasons and principles upon which a legal decision is based The article discusses the recent Supreme Court opinion.
fact
noun \ˈfakt\
Definition of fact
1a: something that has actual existence space exploration is now a fact
b: an actual occurrence prove the fact of damage
2: a piece of information presented as having objective reality These are the hard facts of the case.
3: the quality of being actual: ACTUALITY a question of fact hinges on evidence - facts are just that facts, they need to be interprested by humans to form, theories, opinions, observations, statements and to determine reality
4: a thing done: such as a: CRIME accessory after the fact
Last edited:
Stephen Kowalski
Active Member
I think the greater point is getting lost on this thread. Not a climate denier, not a head in the sand, see no evil, just telling you all that we are living in the best of times, not the worst. 40 years ago discussing climate change would have been ridiculous in the context of oil shortages, cold war, aids epidemic, starvation.... Yep, species die off - sometimes we can do more to help and we should. But, I think helping kids in third world countries get vaccinations might be a higher and more worthy goal. One of those kids might be the next genius who helps solve even bigger problems...
Stephen Kowalski
Active Member
Thanks for the definition from Websters. You may be right, in my "belief" we are better off today and it could be an opinion. Supported by the UN of all crazy organizations. There are also substantial items still needing to be fixed, not denying that, but if everyone keeps lighting their hair on fire over every environmental issue and assumes end of times dogma, nothing will get solved. If you tell me the only thing that is important are wild salmon (a good and noble cause), fair enough, it is just my belief we need to look up and down the entire system to understand real impacts. No one supports corrupt companies, but self righteous anti-farm protesters are equally guilty of misusing and misstating facts. All these threads are similar in how "corrupt" both sides of the argument really are.
This is my opinion: Shutting down every fish farm in Canada will have at best a minimal impact on restoring wild salmon runs. The salmon population is being impacted by several issues, of which the FF's can't do a damn thing about almost all of them. Closing FF's will have a major impact on the economy and on supplying safe and cheap protein to our food markets. So, I certainly favor fixing them when issues arise but closing an industry down to "feel good about ourselves" seems like a really bad idea.
Here are a couple of "opinions" from the UN:
Ageing
The world’s population is ageing: virtually every country in the world is experiencing growth in the number and proportion of older persons in their population. The number of older persons, those aged 60 years or over, has increased substantially in recent years
AIDS
New HIV infections have fallen by 35% since 2000 (by 58% among children) and AIDS-related deaths have fallen by 42% since the peak in 2004.
Atomic Energy
More than 30 countries worldwide are operating 444 nuclear reactors for electricity generation and 66 new nuclear plants are under construction
Ending Poverty
While global poverty rates have been cut by more than half since 2000, one in ten people in developing regions still lives on less than US$1.90 a day
fogged in
Well-Known Member
Hey Stephen
Did you miss this message
"If you wish to continue this dialogue which is quickly becoming trifling, please just PM me so we do not annoy the rest on the forum with discussion re. a differences of opinion."
Did you miss this message
"If you wish to continue this dialogue which is quickly becoming trifling, please just PM me so we do not annoy the rest on the forum with discussion re. a differences of opinion."
Or is it your goal to have the thread removed by Admin?
THESE ARE MARINE HARVEST’S OWN WORDS. Re: Fish Farms
THESE ARE MARINE HARVEST’S OWN WORDS. Re: Fish Farms
Stephen Kowalski
Active Member
Sigh...did you read my message? I am talking about Fish Farms. Just clarified an opinion and wanted to get back on topic. Thanks for the heads up, not trying to cause any grief, hopefully you can see my intention is to stop talking about definitions and just sort through some facts on FF's.
I disagree Stephen. If we removed all the Farms from Clayoquot Sound it would make a world of difference to the Wild Fish there. Reports of up to 90% of the outgoing smolts this year and last year were covered in sea lice from the Farms there. That's a lot more than 'minimal impact', to use your words. That is MY opinion.
Stephen Kowalski
Active Member
Fair enough - all I really want to understand from you folks is some kind of evidence that proves all of these cause and effect assertions. Not saying your wrong, but man, I wold love to see a situation where a no salmon farm return is ten times what a salmon farm influenced return is. If you take Clayoquot Sound as your base line for bad returns caused by FF's, can you show me some close by that show different results where there are no FF's? We all concede lots of other stuff at play, but, it seems to me, BC has had poor returns everywhere and all we do is blame one factor. Alaska, which is hammering the oceans with salmon smolts had another big harvest year. Maybe we should just copy there methods until the whole ecosystem underneath blows up.
Sino, I am really concerned the US propaganda machine has us out after Canadian FF's all the while they are doubling their harvests, having record years, and they plan on expanding there ranching. What happens if we keep our attention focused solely on this and then they blow up the food source underneath this all? We still won't get the healthy salmon returns and the collapse will take decades to recover from. All of this is connected, I just can't believe Alaska is allowed to increase the amount of salmon harvests by the levels we are seeing.
Proof of no harm is supposed to be demonstrated by the proponent - but since the FFs have consistently managed to avoid environmental assessments - unlike other industries - very few places (if any) have had robust and complete baseline data done on things like background levels of sea lice done before they booted-up. AND....
Since FF disease outbreaks are kept hidden, as well - hard to understand what impacts those released diseases have had on adjacent wild stocks.
Since FF disease outbreaks are kept hidden, as well - hard to understand what impacts those released diseases have had on adjacent wild stocks.
Stephen Kowalski
Active Member
Ok, so you are saying there is no proof and because other rivers without direct contact from FF's also show low returns, the onus is on the FF to prove it isn't having any detrimental effects to the other wild stocks as well. Seems like a very broad ask is probably impossible to even do. I was hoping you would show me two systems in close proximity having really big differences. My guess is anything human will have an impact. But, if mitigation and controls are in place, what else can we ask for?
Why ban FF's and not fishing? Couldn't we make equal claims about the sport fisherman hurting our wild stocks? Were the chinook returns big on Vancouver Island where no retention levels were introduced? Did it save any Orca's? I don't know but hoping to learn....
Mostly getting angry about a country that wants to shut down industries because someone somewhere else thinks its a good idea and they will directly benefit from it. It is the state of Oregon building LNG export systems to ship cheap BC gas to Asia (they want to buy it for $0.75/GJ and sell it for $10/GJ). Or the US stopping trans mountain (need to keep Canadian oil only flowing south). Or a tanker ban that bans only Canadian tankers (the US can send 2000+ a year up and down the coast from Alaska to Seattle, but Canada can't have 1). Industries all have inherent risk but thinking that stopping ff's in Canada will fix everything, well, I just wish it was that simple.
Stephen Kowalski
Active Member
I here what you are saying, I just don't quite buy it. I just want to see what the problem really is?
This reminds me of the TMX appeal ruling that had to measure the effect of oil tankers on the population of orcas? We all did a big, huh? 2000 ships a day leaving the harbor, only the 30/month that carry oil somehow have the propeller frequency to harm orcas. That is the problem. If a hypothesis is made to claim two unrelated items are cause and effect, the starting point should be: why would those particular boats and not all boats hurt Orca's? Truth is, they probably do but then, lets address all boat traffic and shut down the cruise ships, the coal ships the cargo tankers, sport fisherman etc. - nope only the oil tankers.
I worry you are making a similar argument here. I don't deny FF's have some effect, they have to. To what degree, well, I need some meat on the bone to see why we hate those things so much. And, again, I don't want the American's feeding the system with protest money to raise prices on there record sockeye catch.
Stephen Kowalski
Active Member
Well, I am a pissed off fisherman and I think the Americans are screwing us over. Sadly, I keep getting convinced they spoon feed inflammatory news into the left wing media and turn loose the internet trolls. Not trying to **** off anyone - but if questions are why you get banned, maybe I should stop now. Who were the guys who got banned?
Dave, can you answer any of the questions I am asking? I know there is a pro FF and an anti FF tribe on here, but can someone show what they are doing is having a dramatic reduction on the salmon stocks?
Similar threads
