
Wild salmon inquiry gets an earful
Salmon- be they farmed, ranched or wild- is a hot topic in British Columbia. So when fisheries officials in Ottawa predicted that over ten million prized sockeye salmon were expected to swim down the coast on their way to spawning grounds in or near the Fraser River last year, fishers of all kinds- commercial, sport and native harvesters- all got their boats and gear ready for a great harvest of surplus fish. But when actual numbers of migrating fish started to come in, there was no surplus for harvesting by anyone. Certain environmentalists jumped on the bandwagon and blamed the costal fish farms for causing the lack of fish, which they said was caused by sea lice from farms attacking the out-migrating sockeye smolts in earlier years.
An official public inquiry is now underway to shed some light on the reason(s) for the discrepancy between the expected and actual number of sockeye salmon returning to the Fraser River in 2009. As expected, many submissions to the inquiry are pointing fingers at the salmon farming industry. But some industry insiders are fighting back, suggesting that environmental groups or individuals enriched by funds provided by American foundations have been tainting the public debate with misinformation. In a recent letter to a Campbell River based newspaper (Campbell River Courier-Islander), Heather Olney had this to say about a previously published letter from a well known anti-salmon farming activist and a member of a scientific advisory committee established by the inquiry; Within the past two days two things have happened that I feel are entirely inappropriate considering the timing of them. First of all Ms Morton and Brian Riddel have published a joint letter in the Campbell River Courier Islander newspaper dated Thursday June 24 refuting an article in the Fiancial Post written by Terence Corcoran entitled " This Science is Fishy " regarding sea lice numbers and returns of pinks to the Broughton last year etc. I think this is highly inappropriate as Ms Morton is a biased activist who has been granted standing and Mr Riddel is on the committee appointed by Judge Cohen. There should be no joint action taken by members of the panel of experts and the individuals granted standing for submissions. Further to that SFU (Simon Fraser University) just granted Ms Morton an honourary degree now giving her the title Dr. Morton. As members on the committee of experts are also comprised of scientists deemed expert from SFU this makes it appear that Ms Morton is being highly favoured by the committee of experts appointed by Judge Cohen. The timing of this doctorate is indeed questionable. Appears the deck is being stacked as it were. As the wife of a Marine Harvest employee I have visited fish farms on the vessel my husband is captain on and know first hand by having seen with my own eyes many things Ms Morton claims are out and out lies. We are ex commercial fishermen. My husband was born in Alert Bay and is a status Indian. His grandfather was James Sewid who was given the Order of Canada for his work in the seventies sitting on the conference of the sea proceedings that took place in Venezuela. My husband knows the Broughton like the back of his hand and also knows the care that is taken to ensure no damage is done to the environment by his industry. Marine Harvest requires everyone in it's departments to re-cycle all recycleables to avoid any garbage being put into the environment. Every possible care is taken to insure the health of the pen stocks and to make sure no damage is done to wild (salmon). The proof has been shown in 2009 returns of pinks. There has been a steady decline in rate of lice in the Broughton on wild and pen stocks which gives issue to why Ms Morton immediately seized the opportunity to blame salmon farms for the non return of sockeye when proven wrong about her claim Broughton pinks would be extinct by 2011. I feel the issue of the two things I've mentioned above should be investigated as inappropriate. |