Federal government petition to end salmon farming in Canadian waters
- Thread starter Crow
- Start date
alex morton
New Member
Yes it is Alexandra Morton - thanks for the welcome.
Not sure if you took the time to read Minister Tootoo's mandate letter, but in it his boss, Justin, wanted him to ensure decisions are based on science and facts and evidence, and serve the public interest. This is a departure from the previous government so I am puzzled how you can say that Minister Tootoo is starting to parrot the previous minister. You are passionate, but in my opinion your ideas are based on a very myoptic view of the whole picture of Pacific Salmon. If you actually talk to those doing research right now and look at the data from salmon health to salmon escapement you will soon notice that issues are still generating more questions than answers. For instance, you will also notice the inconsistencies in some 2015 Fraser Sockeye returns where some met or exceeded brood.....or some like Harrison Sockeye which came in well below brood (the Fraser Sockeye CU that apparently does not swim by salmon farms along our coast according to you). That is just scratching the surface. If you truly want support from those that are presently skeptical of your motives then you should be transparent and objective yourself with the science. As someone that is equally passionate about wild salmon I find it disheartening and frustrating that you keep trying to sell the idea that future of wild salmon here hinges on abolishment of open net pen aquaculture.
One of his Minister Tootoo's many priorities in the mandate letter was to support responsible and sustainable aquaculture. That can include closed containment and you should know that the previous government, albeit not a great one, actually put funds into it. Personally, I am not only glad that this letter was made public (a clear departure from the previous government) because it not only outlined what the top priorities were in a transparent way, but it also sent a message to people such as yourself that understanding issues like this will not be done by crowd funding, blog posts, drum beating, sensational photos with no context or cherry picking of data that suits a certain agenda.
alex morton
New Member
Hello "Shuswap"
Gotta give you credit - you never miss an opportunity
1. "The Canadian aquaculture industry operates under some of the strictest regulations in the world" Minister Tootoo letter March 14, 2016 - this is a line out of the Harper era
2. Back in Norway Marine Harvest recognizes they have to move to closed containment "Marine Harvest is seeking 14 development licenses from the Norwegian government to test and develop a new closed farm technology," Undercurrent News April 12, 2016
If they can do closed containment in Norway, they can do it here. This would solve everyone's issue with this industry and would make it truly sustainable. Apparently the world's biggest salmon farmer, which also operates in BC, Marine Harvest, seems to believe closed containment is worth pursuing. maybe we agree on this?
3. If you want to accuse me of cherry-picking you will have to take that up with the journals that are publishing my science, they do allow people who disagree to publish comments, perhaps you could meet the same bar as I do and get your concerns published?
4. last year I won a lawsuit to prohibit the salmon farming industry from transferring disease-carrying Atlantic salmon smolts from hatcheries into marine pens on our wild salmon migration routes. Incredibly the previous Minister of Fisheries appealed this decision with Marine Harvest. Now the current minister is going through with this. In fact, DFO is in such a rush to get this done, they want the hearing to be in Calgary and have offered to pay my lawyers (Ecojustice) travel expenses! I find this hard to reconcile with the Minister's mandate. Going to court to allow transfer of disease-carrying farmed salmon into net pens on this coast is not in the public interest. Here is my open letter to the Minister http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/...to-the-honourable-minister-hunter-tootoo.html
Gotta give you credit - you never miss an opportunity
1. "The Canadian aquaculture industry operates under some of the strictest regulations in the world" Minister Tootoo letter March 14, 2016 - this is a line out of the Harper era
2. Back in Norway Marine Harvest recognizes they have to move to closed containment "Marine Harvest is seeking 14 development licenses from the Norwegian government to test and develop a new closed farm technology," Undercurrent News April 12, 2016
If they can do closed containment in Norway, they can do it here. This would solve everyone's issue with this industry and would make it truly sustainable. Apparently the world's biggest salmon farmer, which also operates in BC, Marine Harvest, seems to believe closed containment is worth pursuing. maybe we agree on this?
3. If you want to accuse me of cherry-picking you will have to take that up with the journals that are publishing my science, they do allow people who disagree to publish comments, perhaps you could meet the same bar as I do and get your concerns published?
4. last year I won a lawsuit to prohibit the salmon farming industry from transferring disease-carrying Atlantic salmon smolts from hatcheries into marine pens on our wild salmon migration routes. Incredibly the previous Minister of Fisheries appealed this decision with Marine Harvest. Now the current minister is going through with this. In fact, DFO is in such a rush to get this done, they want the hearing to be in Calgary and have offered to pay my lawyers (Ecojustice) travel expenses! I find this hard to reconcile with the Minister's mandate. Going to court to allow transfer of disease-carrying farmed salmon into net pens on this coast is not in the public interest. Here is my open letter to the Minister http://alexandramorton.typepad.com/...to-the-honourable-minister-hunter-tootoo.html
SpringVelocity
Crew Member
Remember also Alex the federal government needs to do better at protecting our rivers and streams. Remember our talk on Shawnigan Creek. Good to see you here.
I hate to say it but agree with Alex. For example in election I heard a lot of blah blah blah we are gong to reverse protections that stripped out protection for all our senstive salmon habitat areas. The plan was a complete reversal of harpers bill 38? Just like this farming issue so far we are seeing very close to the same regime. Well liberals are little more open they seem to have made lots of promises that still aren't being delivered yet. Farming is also one of them. They seem to have no stance at all.
bigdogeh
Well-Known Member
I found this video while looking at your website Alexandra. It's very well done. I hadn't seen it before but it shows how government and industry seem to go against the wishes of their own people, we can only assume for profits. when you look at the "likes" vs "thumbs down" it gives you an idea of how many actually support open containment fish farming in this province. If I had to guess the thumbs down (all 2 of them) would be from the people that put money in their pockets because of it. when will government start to represent the people (taxpayers) that pay their paychecks?
It really is worth watching and I hope some of the forum members take the time to watch it if you haven't seen it already....
It really is worth watching and I hope some of the forum members take the time to watch it if you haven't seen it already....
Thanks Alex and let me express my appreciation for all you have done in shining a light on a subject which powerful big money interests would prefer be kept in the dark. It is obvious that the industry fears you and the science you have done as a threat to their profits and social license. Anyone who follows this debate will have noticed over the years, the viciousness of the personal attacks, intimidation and attempts to discredit you. Industry connected employees, contractors and PR types monitor this forum and have increased their efforts in recent years. They are dedicated, relentless, capable and highly motivated. They may not want to miss the opportunity to take a run at you, but a least here they have to be somewhat civil and more subtle about it. Some, who have posted views and information which the industry does not like, have felt that intimidation, both subtle and gross, so there is some small appreciation for what you must endure. I find it fascinating when they accuse you of some of the very tactics they use in spades.
The rebels, the outsiders, fulfil a critical role and help keep political, economic and academic systems healthy, but it won’t make you wealthy or sleep better. I have no doubt that without that light you are shining, the negative impacts of this industry, which are far from insignificant, would be substantially greater than they currently are. There would also not be the rather limited degree of political will we have now to pursue land based alternatives. They would hate to admit it, but the truth is, you make them better.
Going against the interests of those who wield huge and disproportionate financial resources and power and are highly motivated to discredit or silence you is a very difficult thing. You provide a small counterbalance to an unbalanced system. Thanks again for your service to the nation, to science, Pacific Salmon and to those and the many industries who depend on Pacific Salmon in so many ways, keep shining that light.
The rebels, the outsiders, fulfil a critical role and help keep political, economic and academic systems healthy, but it won’t make you wealthy or sleep better. I have no doubt that without that light you are shining, the negative impacts of this industry, which are far from insignificant, would be substantially greater than they currently are. There would also not be the rather limited degree of political will we have now to pursue land based alternatives. They would hate to admit it, but the truth is, you make them better.
Going against the interests of those who wield huge and disproportionate financial resources and power and are highly motivated to discredit or silence you is a very difficult thing. You provide a small counterbalance to an unbalanced system. Thanks again for your service to the nation, to science, Pacific Salmon and to those and the many industries who depend on Pacific Salmon in so many ways, keep shining that light.
Last edited:
X2...
TheBigGuy
Well-Known Member
Welcome to our forum Alexandra. I'm sure you will find many friends here. Thank you for your tireless efforts to protect our wild Salmon. It is fantastic to have you aboard.
Neither do you....
It's because the industry here does operate under some of the strictest regulations in the world. I rarely like to support politicians but Minister Tootoo has long list of things to accomplish in his mandate letter and considering he has been in the job less than a year now I would like to cut him a little slack. Just because he is not doing what you want him to do does not make him a parrot, in my opinion. There are many ENGOs out there trying to catch his ear trying to pressure him right now, but I hope he stays the course and allows decisions to be based on facts and evidence - not who yells the loudest.
Great. As I stated already Minister Tootoo's letter does not say that he will not support closed containment ventures. I am not against close containment, so I would not necessarily disagree with you here. If the industry here decided to go that route tomorrow I would not raise an eyebrow. What I take issue with are your theories on this subject matter as well as your knowledge about Pacific Salmon, specifically why certain brood years are worse than others. Many of these theories either have no scientific basis, exaggerated with not context, or based on selected data which leaves out other data which does not support your arguments.
Do not blame the journals. When I refer to cherry picking I am referring to the information you either take from studies which is either exaggerated or misinterpreted or not considering information which may not agree with your point of view. As for publishing concerns and comments to your studies you should remember that you and your supporters apparently have no problems posting criticism of the government scientists and industry representatives on blogs and media links. You also apparently have no problem posting cartoons on your blog depicting scientists engaging in deceptive tactics, so which bar of professional conduct do you want to use here?
I am familiar with your lawsuit victory as well as the Minister's appealing of the decision. I am also aware that you continue to call these transferred Atlantic Salmon smolts "disease-carrying" with not one shred of evidence that those smolts were indeed diseased. Where was this evidence of "disease" presented during the trial? Say "virus-carrying" all you want, but it's the stretching past that which I take issue with. I am puzzled why you continually confuse viruses with diseases as they are not interchangeable. How disease comes about is not just a simple "A + B = C" thing. Just because the host has a virus does not necessarily mean that it will develop a disease because of it. You can still have suspicions about those smolts, but suspicions do not necessarily translate into facts. I also wonder if you are aware of the recent work on PRV since the beginning of that trial. Do you ever refer to recent work on the subject by Dr. Kyle Garver - the DFO scientist that you often quote in regards to viral particles in the ocean? This is just one example where you selectively choose the information that makes your case instead of objectively looking at all the information. I do not find it hard to reconcile at all. As I said already, Minister Tootoo's mandate letter calls for decisions to be based on science and facts and evidence. Do we just ignore recent work done because it disagrees with you? How is in the public interest to ignore all the science and just select the work that supports your view on this? You cannot champion science when it is convenient and then throw it in the trash when it does not agree with what you once thought. The evidence you presented during the trial was not the final word on PRV and the Minister is recognizing that. Lastly, the Minister is offering to pay your lawyer's travel costs and you are complaining? Even if you do not agree with the Minister I think that was a nice thing to do.
TheBigGuy
Well-Known Member
The industry here may operate under some of the tightest regulations in the world as you say Shuswap. However there actually has to be some kind of enforcement for regulations to be anything more than a farce. Anyone with any kind of objectivity would understand that the Harper regime systematically gutted all enforcement of environmental regulations during their time in office.
Scientists in federal employ were either gagged or fired if they ever spoke about anything that threatened business interests. There may be many stringent regulations in the aquaculture industry in Canada. However, even reporting a positive test result of virus outbreak from a lab would have been enough to end your career under the Harper administration.
Regulations are all fine and dandy, but they actually have to be enforced. If members of our police forces got censured, suspended, transfered or fired for issuing speeding tickets, how many tickets would be written. How fast do you think people would drive on our public highways if police hadn't issued a ticket in many years?
Regulations have to be coupled with enforcement to actually mean anything. It's exactly the same with environmental regulations. Most businesses knew they could operate with impunity with the Conservatives making sure their departments rarely ever enforced any regulations.
Scientists in federal employ were either gagged or fired if they ever spoke about anything that threatened business interests. There may be many stringent regulations in the aquaculture industry in Canada. However, even reporting a positive test result of virus outbreak from a lab would have been enough to end your career under the Harper administration.
Regulations are all fine and dandy, but they actually have to be enforced. If members of our police forces got censured, suspended, transfered or fired for issuing speeding tickets, how many tickets would be written. How fast do you think people would drive on our public highways if police hadn't issued a ticket in many years?
Regulations have to be coupled with enforcement to actually mean anything. It's exactly the same with environmental regulations. Most businesses knew they could operate with impunity with the Conservatives making sure their departments rarely ever enforced any regulations.
Last edited:
Not only do regulations have to be enforced with fines/consequences that have an impact (along with 3rd party monitoring) - but the regulations need to be developed so that they address key gaps in impacts - something that has been lacking wrt siting criteria and fish health/disease reporting.
If the monitoring is missing (e.g. self-reporting) - or the fines inadequate - it is business as usual - and the fines just become another operating expenses - if it even gets that far. No need to look any farther than Poley mine to see that effect.
Since aquaculture was defined as a "fishery" in the Morton case - and all commercial fisheries have some form of 3rd party monitoring - the extent of which is indexed to a risk assessment - why don't fish farms also have to have 3rd party monitoring?
Why don't they go through an environmental assessment like other industries? It seems incredulous to me that the only industry "in the water" is exempt from CEAA now.
BUT...ya I know - this is where we insert the speaking notes from the PR firms that: "the industry here does operate under some of the strictest regulations in the world" .. nothing to see here - move along folks!
Speaking of simple to understand dynamics - if you don't have a source of disease vectors - you don't get (communicable) disease. That's why the labs that work on diseases have all the checks and balances (security). With the open net-cage technology - well...good luck with that one folks! No way to understand - let alone mitigate what is happening to the wild stocks.
If the monitoring is missing (e.g. self-reporting) - or the fines inadequate - it is business as usual - and the fines just become another operating expenses - if it even gets that far. No need to look any farther than Poley mine to see that effect.
Since aquaculture was defined as a "fishery" in the Morton case - and all commercial fisheries have some form of 3rd party monitoring - the extent of which is indexed to a risk assessment - why don't fish farms also have to have 3rd party monitoring?
Why don't they go through an environmental assessment like other industries? It seems incredulous to me that the only industry "in the water" is exempt from CEAA now.
BUT...ya I know - this is where we insert the speaking notes from the PR firms that: "the industry here does operate under some of the strictest regulations in the world" .. nothing to see here - move along folks!
Speaking of simple to understand dynamics - if you don't have a source of disease vectors - you don't get (communicable) disease. That's why the labs that work on diseases have all the checks and balances (security). With the open net-cage technology - well...good luck with that one folks! No way to understand - let alone mitigate what is happening to the wild stocks.
bigdogeh
Well-Known Member
the sad thing is that with this industry, the longer they operate in the ocean, the better for their bottom line as they are systematically eliminating their competition, wild salmon. and with many industries they put profits at the very top above all else. less wild salmon equals more farmed atlantic salmon being purchased. they've strategically setup operations on the migration routes of our wild salmon. The more I look into this industry, the more evil it seems to be. and for dfo to be involved in supporting this industry to the extent they have is also a huge conflict of interest if they have any interest at all in protecting our wild stocks.
Hello Ms. Morton. Like shuswap, I truly respect your passion for wild salmon, and like him, I question your direction. Your focus is entirely on net pen Atlantic salmon farming here in BC; you claim these farmed fish are the reason wild salmon stocks are declining in BC, and if they were abolished wild salmon would be saved … while I and others have yet to see any supportable data to suggest that is the case. Yes, you have photos of pink and sockeye fry with sea lice, but in reality these stocks, at the population level, are not declining but actually following decades long cyclic abundances, mainly related to freshwater and ocean conditions. You know that but refuse to acknowledge it in your blogs, videos, and media events. I suggest there are far more important issues facing wild BC salmon, issues you do not, ever, speak to.
I would appreciate your thoughts on Alaska’s salmon ranching program and its effects on wild BC sockeye and pink salmon productivity, and, over fishing of wild BC salmon stocks by commercial, FN, and sportsfishers. Seems to me the most effective way to save wild salmon is to stop killing them.
Let’s not talk about freshwater habitat destruction, not yet anyway.
As well, you never criticize net pen salmon farming in Washington State. To my knowledge they are operating in exactly the same the framework as BC farms but they escape your scrutiny … why is that?
I do hope you respond and yes, your presence on this forum does enhance this site, big time. And I really appreciate the fact you use your real name!
I would appreciate your thoughts on Alaska’s salmon ranching program and its effects on wild BC sockeye and pink salmon productivity, and, over fishing of wild BC salmon stocks by commercial, FN, and sportsfishers. Seems to me the most effective way to save wild salmon is to stop killing them.
Let’s not talk about freshwater habitat destruction, not yet anyway.
As well, you never criticize net pen salmon farming in Washington State. To my knowledge they are operating in exactly the same the framework as BC farms but they escape your scrutiny … why is that?
I do hope you respond and yes, your presence on this forum does enhance this site, big time. And I really appreciate the fact you use your real name!
Similar threads
