Fish farm folly
By Ian Lidster
It is a certainty that certain people in certain quarters are certain to be
incapable of doing anything right in the eyes of certain other people, and
therefore there is no point in the party of the first part doing anything
whatsoever to defend itself against the accusations of the party of the
second part.
In other words, in the eyes of the more militant guerrilla troops of the
environmental movement salmon farming is a sea-louse ridden violation of
all that they deem sacred and arguing with steel-trap closed minds is akin
to arguing abortion with Sister Cecilia or capital punishment with Saddam
Hussein -- there's just no point.
Every time yet another anti-fish farm finding is trotted before a public
that knows little about salmon and its fishery other than it tastes
wonderful after it has been sprinkled with dill and thrown on the barbecue
the perpetrators of mythology about the evils of the raising captive stocks
know that they will co-opt the uninformed to their side. And, the Salmon
Farmers' Association will predictably offer rather plaintive justifications
for what they do and the quality of their product.
In other words, the Association is reactive. Maybe it's high time they were
proactive.
Better therefore for fish farm operators and their society spokespersons to
mount a campaign of advocacy declaring the virtues of their industry. Let
the public in on the realities of the trade and stop responding to negative
diatribes, because the diatribes will always be there.
In so stating, I am not coming down on one side of the issue or the other.
I have friends and acquaintances in the commercial fishery, and I have
friends and acquaintances that are connected with fish farming. So, I say
the rhetoric should move beyond knee-jerk reaction, and become informative.
It should also, on the part of the fish farmers, be based on a certain
understanding of their adversaries.
The folks who hate fish farming have multifoliate reasons for so doing, and
there are agendas all over the place. They are big guys, with big bucks,
and a multi-national propaganda machine to back up their assertions, both
spurious and sometimes legitimate. There's no point in arguing with these
people. Advocates for the coastal forest industry learned that grim fact a
long time ago. When they bring in their Bobby Kennedy Jr. sorts and other
privileged darlings of the movement, all is bound to be lost on the home
front if those who are simply trying to make an honest living on northern
Vancouver Island or the Mainland coast try to fight them at their level.
A good case in point would be the huge front-page play the Vancouver Sun
recently gave to a "scientific" finding that farmed fish were inordinately
high in PCBs and therefore a consuming public was unwise to consume
anything but the tiniest bit of farmed fish at very rare sittings.
The science of the report was, of course, profoundly skewed to put fish
farming in a negative light. How does somebody in Port Hardy fight an
article like that on the front page of the largest newspaper in the
province?
It cannot be done. No amount of letters to the editor, or indeed
damage-control editorials by the newspaper in question itself, can undo
what has been done. It's sad, really. Mom told us to play fair. But, the
other guys don't. Fish farmers should learn to live with it.
They should learn to live with it, and they should fight fire with fire. In
other words, get their own information out there. If fish farming is as
safe and legitimate an industry as its advocates profess it is, then let
the public know that, and answer some of those nagging questions.
Does it pollute and threaten wild stocks? What's the deal with those pesky
sea-lice? Are all operators required to meet very specific and stringent
environmental standards? If not, why not? Are there ways of policing those
operators who are in violation? What are the penalties? Why do we use
Atlantic salmon rather than a Pacific Ocean species?
Kill the myths, and the association will go a long way towards stealing the
thunder of the critics.
Fish farming is not is not a new thing in the world. The Asians have been
doing it for centuries, and travelers to the Hawaiian Islands have seen
the giant fish ponds to be found on various islands there. Why does it need
to be such a contentious issue in coastal British Columbia?
Some answers would be appreciated. Maybe a new approach would be
appreciated as well.
It is a certainty that certain people in certain quarters are certain to be
incapable of doing anything right in the eyes of certain other people, and
therefore there is no point in the party of the first part doing anything
whatsoever to defend itself against the accusations of the party of the
second part.
In other words, in the eyes of the more militant guerrilla troops of the
environmental movement salmon farming is a sea-louse ridden violation of
all that they deem sacred and arguing with steel-trap closed minds is akin
to arguing abortion with Sister Cecilia or capital punishment with Saddam
Hussein -- there's just no point.
Every time yet another anti-fish farm finding is trotted before a public
that knows little about salmon and its fishery other than it tastes
wonderful after it has been sprinkled with dill and thrown on the barbecue
the perpetrators of mythology about the evils of the raising captive stocks
know that they will co-opt the uninformed to their side. And, the Salmon
Farmers' Association will predictably offer rather plaintive justifications
for what they do and the quality of their product.
In other words, the Association is reactive. Maybe it's high time they were
proactive.
Better therefore for fish farm operators and their society spokespersons to
mount a campaign of advocacy declaring the virtues of their industry. Let
the public in on the realities of the trade and stop responding to negative
diatribes, because the diatribes will always be there.
In so stating, I am not coming down on one side of the issue or the other.
I have friends and acquaintances in the commercial fishery, and I have
friends and acquaintances that are connected with fish farming. So, I say
the rhetoric should move beyond knee-jerk reaction, and become informative.
It should also, on the part of the fish farmers, be based on a certain
understanding of their adversaries.
The folks who hate fish farming have multifoliate reasons for so doing, and
there are agendas all over the place. They are big guys, with big bucks,
and a multi-national propaganda machine to back up their assertions, both
spurious and sometimes legitimate. There's no point in arguing with these
people. Advocates for the coastal forest industry learned that grim fact a
long time ago. When they bring in their Bobby Kennedy Jr. sorts and other
privileged darlings of the movement, all is bound to be lost on the home
front if those who are simply trying to make an honest living on northern
Vancouver Island or the Mainland coast try to fight them at their level.
A good case in point would be the huge front-page play the Vancouver Sun
recently gave to a "scientific" finding that farmed fish were inordinately
high in PCBs and therefore a consuming public was unwise to consume
anything but the tiniest bit of farmed fish at very rare sittings.
The science of the report was, of course, profoundly skewed to put fish
farming in a negative light. How does somebody in Port Hardy fight an
article like that on the front page of the largest newspaper in the
province?
It cannot be done. No amount of letters to the editor, or indeed
damage-control editorials by the newspaper in question itself, can undo
what has been done. It's sad, really. Mom told us to play fair. But, the
other guys don't. Fish farmers should learn to live with it.
They should learn to live with it, and they should fight fire with fire. In
other words, get their own information out there. If fish farming is as
safe and legitimate an industry as its advocates profess it is, then let
the public know that, and answer some of those nagging questions.
Does it pollute and threaten wild stocks? What's the deal with those pesky
sea-lice? Are all operators required to meet very specific and stringent
environmental standards? If not, why not? Are there ways of policing those
operators who are in violation? What are the penalties? Why do we use
Atlantic salmon rather than a Pacific Ocean species?
Kill the myths, and the association will go a long way towards stealing the
thunder of the critics.
Fish farming is not is not a new thing in the world. The Asians have been
doing it for centuries, and travelers to the Hawaiian Islands have seen
the giant fish ponds to be found on various islands there. Why does it need
to be such a contentious issue in coastal British Columbia?
Some answers would be appreciated. Maybe a new approach would be
appreciated as well.
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home