Print

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

[shuswapsteve]

Perhaps anti-salmon farm advocates should give some thought to presenting the pros and cons to land based options?  I'd love to see an unbiased cost analysis of ocean vs land as well as an analysis of the environmental impacts of each on the known measurable like energy consumption and waste production.

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/lib-bib/nasapi-inpasa/BC-aquaculture-CB-eng.pdf
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/CSAS/Csas/Publications/SAR-AS/2008/SAR-AS2008_001_e.pdf

[JPW]

Salmon feedlots are a business and as such are responsible for finding their own solutions on how to run their business responsibly. I don't see how Morton should be responsible for helping them grow an environmentally responsible business. And even if she came up with alternative ways of operating that business, do you really think they would adopt them?

This has nothing to do with benefiting the farms and everything to do with focusing Morton's attention on changing business practices to benefit wild salmon - that is the goal isn't it?  In my opinion her energy and those of her supporters would be better served finding an economically and environmentally viable method of farming salmon, rather than pointing a finger at the same issues repeatedly.  The general population has a short attention span, is apathetic, and will take the path of least resistance.  

I agree with Chris that the gov't should be making decisions with our children's future in mind, but the most recent decisions clearly demonstrate a different agenda.  To that end, it's going to take more effort than just a fraction of the passionate public to make a difference.  In my own experience I've urged friends and family not to buy farmed salmon, while generally apathetic, they were swayed only by my passion on the subject and to that end vowed to make the switch to only buy wild.  That left me in the unenviable and rather weak position of educating them why they shouldn't buy wild salmon.  If I did a good job, they now vowed to not buy wild for about as long as it took them to tell me so.  The reality is people like salmon and all of the marketing is telling them they should eat more of it.
I quickly went from being an advocate of wild salmon to an unreasonable extremist.  

If Morton's goal is to save wild salmon, she needs more support and most people only change behaviours when it's easy and convenient.  If I can tell my friends and family they can still eat salmon from land based farms but should boycott ocean based, they are FAR more likely to embrace that idea then to forgo salmon altogether.

Don't you thing the government should be promoting this and finding a solution?

I definitely think they should be and I'm very grateful to people like yourself who feel the same way and fight to make a difference and raise awareness.  I just believe the constant message about the farms being disease ridden evil entities (whether true or not) is getting old and that's a problem.  Perhaps one solution would be to focus energy on promoting a better way to farm?

[JPW]

http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/aquaculture/lib-bib/nasapi-inpasa/BC-aquaculture-CB-eng.pdf
http://www.dfo-mpo.gc.ca/CSAS/Csas/Publications/SAR-AS/2008/SAR-AS2008_001_e.pdf

Thank you!  I look forward to reading it.

[alwaysfishn]

In my opinion her energy and those of her supporters would be better served finding an economically and environmentally viable method of farming salmon, rather than pointing a finger at the same issues repeatedly.  

I'm not sure what your business experience is.....  

Isn't it the responsibility of the feedlot business to find an economically and environmentally viable method of farming salmon? Suggesting that Morton should raise private funds to help the feedlot industry do that would be like suggesting Chris spend his time and efforts developing ways to remove gravel from the Fraser River. While business would appreciate the help so they could pocket the profits, it's just not how business works.

While government is investing heavily to help the feedlots, they have abandoned their primary responsibility which is to protect wild salmon. Fortunately for the wild salmon, Morton has stepped up to help them.

[JPW]

I'm not sure what your business experience is.....  

I hope I'm wrong in thinking you're making an effort to belittle my business competence and instead simply misunderstanding my point for a second time.

Isn't it the responsibility of the feedlot business to find an economically and environmentally viable method of farming salmon? Suggesting that Morton should raise private funds to help the feedlot industry do that would be like suggesting Chris spend his time and efforts developing ways to remove gravel from the Fraser River. While business would appreciate the help so they could pocket the profits, it's just not how business works.

It is the responsibility of the business to do as you have suggested, Morton is arguing that they are not.  I'm suggesting another way to achieve her goal would be to educate the public how land based farming can be economically and environmentally viable and in doing so attain better support from the general salmon eating public.  Resultantly, changing buying habits to support land based operations and forcing ocean based businesses to make the transition. 

While government is investing heavily to help the feedlots, they have abandoned their primary responsibility which is to protect wild salmon. Fortunately for the wild salmon, Morton has stepped up to help them.

Helping wild salmon doesn't simply mean ending salmon farming...

[troutbreath]

Like why should it be up to Morton to get salmon farmers to do to right thing? It should be the government stopping those bad practices from occuring. Get with the program man Or go out and get yourself another choss of that farmed salmon. Maybe you and Dave can have a BBQ.

Again another poster thinking that were anti salmon farmers? It must be the SLICE.

[alwaysfishn]

I hope I'm wrong in thinking you're making an effort to belittle my business competence and instead simply misunderstanding my point for a second time.

If you're thinking that...  you would be wrong. If the feedlot business was to hire Morton to give them advice on how to structure their business so that it would not harm wild salmon, I am sure that she would be happy to take on that contract. However I am sure you and I can agree that they wouldn't offer that type of contract nor would they take any advice she gave them even if it was for free.

It is the responsibility of the business to do as you have suggested, Morton is arguing that they are not.  I'm suggesting another way to achieve her goal would be to educate the public how land based farming can be economically and environmentally viable and in doing so attain better support from the general salmon eating public.  Resultantly, changing buying habits to support land based operations and forcing ocean based businesses to make the transition. 

As long as business can reap a higher profit running their feedlots in the ocean rather than on land they will make every effort to resist moving to closed containment. Closed containment will not generate the same profits ocean feedlots will generate. For a corporation being environmentally responsible will always be secondary to generating profits. The only way to force change on business is by convincing the public that they shouldn't buy the feedlot product. I believe Morton has been very effective in doing that.

Helping wild salmon doesn't simply mean ending salmon farming...

I don't think Morton or anyone opposed to ocean feedlots opposes salmon farming..... we just believe they shouldn't be doing it using open pens anchored in the ocean where wild salmon can come in contact with them.

[purple monster]

“It must be considered that there is nothing more difficult to carry out, nor more doubtful of success, nor more dangerous to handle, than to initiate a new order of things.”
― Niccolò Machiavelli, Unknown Book 6404579

[JPW]

If you're thinking that...  you would be wrong. If the feedlot business was to hire Morton to give them advice on how to structure their business so that it would not harm wild salmon, I am sure that she would be happy to take on that contract. However I am sure you and I can agree that they wouldn't offer that type of contract nor would they take any advice she gave them even if it was for free.

I apologize, because I don’t feel like I'm very successfully presenting my thoughts and as a result you still seem to misunderstand what I’m trying to say.

Let me try this another way:

1. Demand for salmon is very high.
2. Commercially harvesting wild salmon to meet that demand isn’t the answer.
3. Farming salmon in open net pens isn’t the answer.

To me, Morton predominantly focuses on two messages:

A. Farmed salmon are harmful to wild fish.
B. Salmon are sacred.

You say:

The only way to force change on business is by convincing the public that they shouldn't buy the feedlot product. I believe Morton has been very effective in doing that.

 
I have a couple of questions:

- When people stop buying “feedlot product” what do they buy instead?  Keeping in mind  2 and B.
- What do you feel is a more successful tactic.  Giving up something cold turkey or being offered an alternative?

Finally, this is just my opinion, but based on discussions with friends and family who are far less informed on the topic (like most of the general public) when you say:

I don't think Morton or anyone opposed to ocean feedlots opposes salmon farming..... we just believe they shouldn't be doing it using open pens anchored in the ocean where wild salmon can come in contact with them.

That is not the message I get AT ALL and I suspect I’m not alone.  That is why I suggested some thought be devoted to educating the general public to the viability of an alternative source of farmed salmon.  In my humble opinion, to do anything less is simply trading one problem for another.

[alwaysfishn]

I think you and I are seeing the industry in basically the same way.

It's a great idea to educate the public, however that takes a lot of investment dollars. The only people that have that kind of money to invest are the feedlot business and government. Unfortunately neither of them has the survival of wild salmon as a priority.

Morton has limited funds and as such can only educate the public if the media re-broadcasts her message. This is where the pro feedlot boys get on her case for "grandstanding". However if she wasn't out there "grandstanding", the public wouldn't get any education on the dangers of feedlot farming and the wild salmon would be in worse shape. Of course this is what the feedlot industry wants.

The feedlot industry has filled a "need for salmon" however by being able to cheaply grow the stuff with little consideration for the environment, they have also been able to grow the market. The market would shrink if the price of the salmon was higher and/or if the public turned against the open pen grown stuff. Many British Columbian's are avoiding the purchase of the feedlot product in restaurants and more of them are looking for alternatives in the grocery stores. That's why the majority of BC's feedlot product is exported to the US, where they have no clue of the effects of the feedlot industry.

My understanding of Morton's stand is that she could care less where they grow the stuff, as long as it isn't grown in open pens in the ocean. She does believe salmon are sacred because she understands how vital the salmon are to the entire west coast eco system. The loss of wild salmon would be devastating. And despite what the feedlot industry wants you to believe, the limited science(seemingly purposely limited by DFO), together with simple logic suggests the feedlots are harmful to wild salmon. And yes there are other factors affecting the survival of wild salmon, however this thread is about the feedlot's effect on them.

[Fisherbob]

Perhaps if the salmon feedlots in BC operated like our good neighbours to the south run their atlantic "feedlots" in Washington, all would be ok.

[Dave]

Perhaps if the salmon feedlots in BC operated like our good neighbours to the south run their atlantic "feedlots" in Washington, all would be ok.

How are they run differently?

[Fisherbob]

Dave, I am only assuming this because I have never seen the Washington state atlantic feedlots on Dr Morton or Stanifords radar.

[Dave]

Dave, I am only assuming this because I have never seen the Washington state atlantic feedlots on Dr Morton or Stanifords radar.

Nor is commercial, FN and sports overfishing or Alaskan salmon ranching, habitat loss, or climate change.  Who would fund and support her endeavours if they did address these issues?

Exactly right.

[StillAqua]

Nor is commercial, FN and sports overfishing or Alaskan salmon ranching, habitat loss, or climate change.  Who would fund and support her endeavours if they did address these issues?

Exactly right.

I do find myself troubled by her continued silence about Alaskan ranched salmon, marketed as wild-caught, which will be the obvious beneficiaries of this farmed salmon boycott. Does she not understand how salmon ranching works or could affect genetics and diseases in wild fish? Hatchery-raised native species released in vast numbers to co-mingle and compete with wild salmon in their oceanic feeding grounds? If wild salmon are so sacred, how can she not see and be concerned about the risks from Alaskan, Russian and Japanese ranching? She seems like a bright woman so I understand why it raises alarm bells about her true motives.