Study: Trophic Interactions and Consumption of Wild Fish and Plankton by Cage Reared Salmon in BC

Again just because it happens on one side of the earth in a ecosystem onto its own doesn't mean it is or will happen here or does it?
 
I believe so.... You are saying that the pacific ocean and the Atlantic oceans are the same and that they are just labels correct?
 
"Atlantic and Pacific are just labels. As a responsible regulator - one would use the hard-learned experiences from the Atlantic to not repeat the same mistakes in the Pacific - "

I'm just asking why we should close down an industry based on studies done on the other side of the world in a different ocean with a different ecosystem. It seems all this controversy is over Atlantic non native species so why not the movement to remove these fish?
 
I'm just asking why we should close down an industry based on studies done on the other side of the world in a different ocean with a different ecosystem. It seems all this controversy is over Atlantic non native species so why not the movement to remove these fish?
The controversy for me is the impacts on wild stocks. Why wouldn't you learn from others mistakes??
 
I believe so.... You are saying that the pacific ocean and the Atlantic oceans are the same and that they are just labels correct?
Impacts are site-specific. Labeling 1 stretch of water as "Pacific" and then walking away saying there will be no impacts because that stretch of water is now somehow magically protected after being called the "Pacific" - is living in a make-believe fairyland IMHO...
 
Yes I can understand and appreciate using other impacts as a base line but to put forward the studies and say it is happening here are different. Closing an industry based on different ecosystems is not good management. Seems we use any study in the world to disprove this industry because we cannot find faults in our own.
 
There is(are) a reason(s) why adequate baseline work was not done. This was covered many times in other threads....
 
Back
Top