http://www.campbellrivermirror.com/opinion/letters/291756691.html#.VN02UTqTRSE.facebook
Ed was ok until he got to the 4th paragraph. That's when his argument starts to nose dive. He brings up the Cohen Report saying how Stewart Hawthorn "cherry picked" his information from the report.....but then Ed starts talking about Norway which was not the scope of the Cohen Inquiry or the Final Report. He talks about what Stewart fails to mention in the report but then goes sideways and starts talking about Norway. Why not talk about what Cohen found and didn't find? The reason is that it doesn't support critics claims that aquaculture is the primary cause of Fraser Sockeye declines.
Who funds this "ongoing" research? Well, I imagine he is insinuating that it is solely funded by BC fish farms; however, the fact is that these are collaborative efforts (PSF, DFO, universities, Genome BC, American scientists, and industry) with funding coming from not just industry, but the PSF and DFO. When Ed or his buddies buy a salmon stamp that money can potentially go to these efforts. So, who funds this? Well, you do in a way, Ed.
Fallowing of sites has been going on since 2003/2004 to my knowledge. It wasn't a new concept in 2008 (the outmigrants which contributed to the record 2010 return), so Ed's recollection is incorrect.