Back to the FF issue. So, I watched the video from the banned thread about Vivian Krause. I have been to a lecture of hers and met her. She is not a tin foil hat crazy but a researcher, and a real "dogooder" (I didn't build houses for the poor in third world countries). What is terribly disturbing, sorry admins for linking it, is that the overarching campaigns against FF's, LNG, TMX, Northern Gateway, Tarsands,...etc, all have deployed the same tactics and been funded by the same groups. Yes, Jason Kenney has also determined this is real and becoming an existential threat.
When I joined this forum, I really wanted to know why Alaskan ranching gets a free pass? Why did they have record returns and we didn't? All I get is FF's are bad, if we shut them down, salmon will heal. I don't have a dog in this fight, but that seems very over simplified and likely to fail. In fact, none of the anti-FF advocates will guarantee success or agree to spend tax dollars to do this. Looking through these past threads, it seems we can have big returns in the presence of FF's on any given year, so maybe that isn't the boogeyman.
Alaska had record returns this year and are harvesting more "ranched" salmon than in their record years of wild salmon. Think about it, our runs are in trouble, they are harvesting over 2x what their very best years were before salmon ranching was introduced. How much can the system hold? Are we good if they go to 4x or 10x? They just keep going for more and the groups supporting them are sending money to the anti-FF lobby in Canada. Not accusing any of you as being part of the lobby, but if all we do is focus on what they tell us too, we will all be sitting in our boats with our fingers up our butts talking about the good old days when we fished for salmon.
