Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[blaydRnr]

Alexandra Morton comes across as somewhat misguided...she asks for a moratorium on fish farming, but neglects to acknowledge human mishandling and mismanagement as the root of many of the industry's problems....she offers no alternative solutions and uses scare tactics to twist facts around...i wonder if she's more about the P.R. than the actual issue itself.

in reality, if you've followed her research since the early 90's you'll know her true passion was the study of killer whales and it was only after the decline of the whales migration to the Broughton Archipelago that she turned to the fish farming industry (which has been active since the early 70's) as the source of their decline... it's a known fact she's got a personal "beef" with the local farms.

It's also fact that at one point her research almost ended due to lack of funding until she published her papers in the journal science and promoted her non profit charity through lectures and public appearances in both Canada and the US.

In 2009 alone her charity Rainforest Research Society (Lorequest) claimed almost $900,000 in monetary revenue for the fiscal tax year...not bad for someone who admits she has no scientific facts to back up any of her studies.

[alwaysfishn]

Your analysis is equivalent to someone looking at their doctor and saying.... "My doctor is a somewhat limited in what they do. When I have a heart problem he sends me to a heart specialist....  when I have a foot problem he sends me to a specialist.....   why doesn't he do all that himself?"

Perhaps you could provide a link for your claim that her society "claimed almost $900,000 in monetary revenue for the fiscal tax year". First of all the number is not even close to being accurate.....  Second, the total revenue of a charity only indicates the amount of donations received and does not indicate how much a particular director or employee made in income. Looking at the top line and suggesting it is the income of Morton is as ludicrous as your initial analysis that "Alexandra Morton comes across as somewhat misguided".

[blaydRnr]

Your analysis is equivalent to someone looking at their doctor and saying.... "My doctor is a somewhat limited in what they do. When I have a heart problem he sends me to a heart specialist....  when I have a foot problem he sends me to a specialist.....   why doesn't he do all that himself?"

Perhaps you could provide a link for your claim that her society "claimed almost $900,000 in monetary revenue for the fiscal tax year". First of all the number is not even close to being accurate.....  Second, the total revenue of a charity only indicates the amount of donations received and does not indicate how much a particular director or employee made in income. Looking at the top line and suggesting it is the income of Morton is as ludicrous as your initial analysis that "Alexandra Morton comes across as somewhat misguided".

actually her society from 2000-2010 had an accumulation of  $913,796  (it was err on my part in disclosing the proper time frame).

in response to your own analysis....doctors know their limitations and will refer a patient to someone who specializes in the field. they don't draw conclusions based on conjecture  (So what exactly is your point?)...also as the saying goes, it never hurts to get a second opinion. Alexandra Morton has a habit of concluding with probabilities rather than with concrete facts...and her tactics at times is at best questionable.

[alwaysfishn]

actually her society from 2000-2010 had an accumulation of  $913,796  (it was err on my part in disclosing the proper time frame).

Thanks for correcting that.....   At an average of $90,000 per year, after paying for the research, travel and lawyers, Alexandra isn't exactly rolling in cash as you implied in your previous post.

....... Alexandra Morton has a habit of concluding with probabilities rather than with concrete facts...

Another error on your part, as that my friend is your opinion and has no basis of fact.

I appreciate that you may not like Alex, but posting inaccurate statements about her and stating your opinion as fact, just reflects badly on your own credibility.

[blaydRnr]

Thanks for correcting that.....   At an average of $90,000 per year, after paying for the research, travel and lawyers, Alexandra isn't exactly rolling in cash as you implied in your previous post.

Another error on your part, as that my friend is your opinion and has no basis of fact.

I appreciate that you may not like Alex, but posting inaccurate statements about her and stating your opinion as fact, just reflects badly on your own credibility.

first of all my original post wasn't intended to imply that she was using her charity as a means of personal monetary gain, rather than a means of promoting her idealistic views...if you've ever followed her work as i have prior to her status as an activist, you would know she specialized in killer whales and was actually an initial supporter of salmon farming.

second of all, a simple google of her published papers and interviews will prove to you by her own admission that some of her lab tests and findings has never been proven as an attribution to salmon farming.

here's something you might want to read just to show you i'm not making up statements as i'm going along...also you're so adamant about your views in support of Alexandra Morton, how about you find me some concrete facts to back up your own credibility?

http://fairquestions.typepad.com/rethink_campaigns/ten-reasons-why-some-sea-lice-research-claims-are-false.html

I personally don't have a problem with Alexandra Morton as a biologist and even as an environmentalist, but I don't agree with her activist tactics and reasoning.
 
"We must plant the sea and herd its animals using the sea as farmers instead of hunters. That is what civilization is all about - farming replacing hunting."

– Jacques Yves Cousteau

[blaydRnr]

I'm a true believer in conservation, but I also believe in diversification. What I can't understand is how people can't get a grasp of how the two, go hand in hand.  The issue is not whether we should continue to farm fish, but how to improve it.

That's my beef with the anti farming mentality...In perspective how do you meet the demands of an ever growing population? When do we react ? When it's too late? You can't diversify, if you stop striving to improve or change the flaws of an industry...This is no different from the concerns over fossil fuel, water, forest, and general food industry.

You can protest all you want, but until an alternative has been put in place, we will always rely on our natural resources until we bring it to the brink of depletion. I think some of you need to refocus your objectives and look at the overall picture.

[alwaysfishn]

I'm not against fish farming in someplace like Chile or even using land based systems in BC. Just a little common sense suggests that planting these feedlot cesspools in the middle of wild salmon travel routes and habitat is a recipe for the destruction of our wild salmon. Things like sea lice, viruses etc, etc are fact and contribute to the destruction of wild salmon. History proves that wherever you farm, you destroy or displace wildlife. In the case of wild salmon the feedlots are destroying them.

Maligning someone like Alex who is passionately fighting to save wild salmon does nothing to enhance your position.

[blaydRnr]

I'm not against fish farming in someplace like Chile or even using land based systems in BC. Just a little common sense suggests that planting these feedlot cesspools in the middle of wild salmon travel routes and habitat is a recipe for the destruction of our wild salmon. Things like sea lice, viruses etc, etc are fact and contribute to the destruction of wild salmon. History proves that wherever you farm, you destroy or displace wildlife. In the case of wild salmon the feedlots are destroying them.

There has never been proof showing the true correlation of sea lice and their life cycle in the wild to those found in fish pens.

Viruses like IHN is naturally found in the wild and is endemic. The concerns were more towards the Atlantic species which are susceptible to the disease (where BC Wild Salmon are carriers of the virus and have generally become immune) and the fear is if they were to contract IHN,  could the virus genetically mutate to a more lethal state?....once again never substantiated, but publicized as the worse case scenario.

Maligning someone like Alex who is passionately fighting to save wild salmon does nothing to enhance your position.

No I'm not maligning her, I just don't believe in closing the books on progress without disclosure of finalized studies of the pro's and con's.
 
She refused to work with DFO through a government sponsored lab because she felt she could do better on her own without the confines of the ministry's guidelines and bureaucracy...this coming from someone who relies solely on volunteers and donations...passionate or arrogant? or maybe just unsure of herself?


 
 

[alwaysfishn]

There has never been proof showing the true correlation of sea lice and their life cycle in the wild to those found in fish pens.

Viruses like IHN is naturally found in the wild and is endemic. The concerns were more towards the Atlantic species which are susceptible to the disease (where BC Wild Salmon are carriers of the virus and have generally become immune) and the fear is if they were to contract IHN,  could the virus genetically mutate to a more lethal state?....once again never substantiated, but publicized as the worse case scenario.

Unfortunately you're ignoring the effects of concentrating sea lice and viruses in the feedlot environment and the resulting effect on the environment....

No I'm not maligning her, I just don't believe in closing the books on progress without disclosure of finalized studies of the pro's and con's.

You started your discussion by saying that her society had income of over $900,000 in 2009. That's defined as maligning someone. When challenged you did a little more research and corrected the time frame.

 

She refused to work with DFO through a government sponsored lab because she felt she could do better on her own without the confines of the ministry's guidelines and bureaucracy...this coming from someone who relies solely on volunteers and donations...passionate or arrogant? or maybe just unsure of herself?

Is this another one of your "facts" that you pulled out of the air? Why not add a link to back up your "facts"?  If you want to be objective about the issue you need to start reading more than the feedlot propaganda that you got your $900,000 "fact" from.....

[blaydRnr]

yes i corrected myself before so why do you need to keep going back to what was already rectified?

propaganda feedlot? really? since you're so big on links, how about you give me one link that backs Alexandra Morton's claims in the scientific community...just one.

here's a sugar coated news article from cbc that may suit your palate...as far as information goes, where do you get yours from? PETA?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/09/25/bc-alexandra-morton-testing-group.html

[Dave]

yes i corrected myself before so why do you need to keep going back to what was already rectified?

propaganda feedlot? really? since you're so big on links, how about you give me one link that backs Alexandra Morton's claims in the scientific community...just one.

here's a sugar coated news article from cbc that may suit your palate...as far as information goes, where do you get yours from? PETA?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/story/2012/09/25/bc-alexandra-morton-testing-group.html

blaydRnr, welcome to the quicksand known as alwaysfishn   Good comments.

[alwaysfishn]

I see that even where you are getting your info from, you rephrase the information to present your biased picture of Morton.....

Here's what it says in the article you provided a link for: "Morton said she made her decision ......... because she said she's not allowed to present fish samples to DFO for testing."

You wrote:

She refused to work with DFO through a government sponsored lab because she felt she could do better on her own without the confines of the ministry's guidelines and bureaucracy...

Isn't that exactly the opposite of what the article says? 

[blaydRnr]

what you read was an edited subsection of the full storyline...the truth of the matter was DFO didn't accept the samples because they were hand picked by Morton herself without the presence nor consent of the ministry and they couldn't verify their origins...they also felt she needed to follow proper protocol within their guidelines.

try googling it helps...believe it or not her studies can be attained through your local library both in audio and video...i already knew of Alexandra Morton during my college days even before she jumped on the anti salmon farming band wagon, so for you to accuse me of being bias and pulling information out of the air or plagiarizing public information for the sake of rephrasing it to suit my views is insulting.

[alwaysfishn]

...the truth of the matter was DFO didn't accept the samples because they were hand picked by Morton herself without the presence nor consent of the ministry and they couldn't verify their origins...they also felt she needed to follow proper protocol within their guidelines.

Doesn't match what you said here......

She refused to work with DFO through a government sponsored lab because she felt she could do better on her own without the confines of the ministry's guidelines and bureaucracy...this coming from someone who relies solely on volunteers and donations...passionate or arrogant? or maybe just unsure of herself?

Would you like to correct yourself again?

[blaydRnr]

how would you know when you haven't even read the full article?.... you want to talk about paraphrasing you're doing exactly what you're accusing me of!

find the article...read it so you don't make a complete a** of yourself...go to the library and check out the archives then get back to me.

here's a little hint: The Cohen Commission hearing on the decline of the sockeye salmon.

I'm done.